IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DIRECTIVES ON HEALTH AND … · IMPLEMENTATION OF OSH DIRECTIVES REDUCTION PROPOSALS, CTD. Making labour inspection visits more efficient •Still under consideration

2010-11-08IMPLEMENTATION OF OSH DIRECTIVES

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, EMPL COMMITTEE

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DIRECTIVES ON HEALTH AND SAFETY AT WORK AS A COST FACTOR


AIMS OF THE STUDY

•A better understanding of the importance of OSH as a contributing factor to the economic viability of companies, esp SMEs

•Potential effects of the proposals for reducing administrative burdens in the field of health and safety at work

•To what extent, and how well, current obligations are carried out in particular by SMEs

•Could cutting down on the information obligations be a barrier to achieving the targets on prevention and reduction of work-related accidents and diseases?


OSH IN EUROPE

•Main Directive: 89/391/EEC – the OSH Framework Directive

•Defines key principles for prevention and protection of health and safety of workers

•2004 review on implementation of directives showed major shortcomings in SMEs complying with EU OSH legislation, esp. regarding

•risk assessment

•workers' participation and training

•traditional high-risk sectors: agriculture, construction


OSH IN EUROPE, CTD.

•Shortcomings stemming primarily from:

•lack of specific targeted information distributed locally and comprehensible guidelines;

•poor capacity and skills

•lack of resources for training of workforce and managers

•poor access to effective, specific and specialised technical assistance.


EU STRATEGY ON HEALTH AND SAFETY AT WORK 2007-2012

•Aims to achieve 25% cut in accidents at work across the EU by 2012

•Action at Community level focuses mainly on updating and simplifying existing legislative measures, providing guidance and fostering cooperation and exchange of best practices between MS

•Most of the concrete action to be taken downstream by stakeholders e.g. at national level


EU ACTION PROGRAMME FOR REDUCING ADMINISTRATIVE BURDENS

•2007: Action Programme on reducing administrative burdens in the European Union (for baseline measurement of admin burdens)

•Objective: to reduce administrative burdens by 25% by 2012

•2009 Communication: identifying 13 priority areas incl ”Working environment / employment relations”

•8 proposals for reduction measures in Working Environment

•2 already adopted, 6 under preparation


CONCRETE REDUCTION PROPOSALS

Exempting very small firms from having to produce a written assessment of the risks to health and safety

•Concerns a fundamental obligation of the acquis

•Still under consideration/preparation, subject to in-depth study

•removal of this obligation for smallest companies not met with approval - a more differentiated, risk-based approach and/or simplified approach proposed


REDUCTION PROPOSALS, CTD.

Facilitate lighter transpositions by Member States of the Health and Safety of Workers Framework Directive

•Still under consideration

•Understanding of the purpose of the law and the possibilities for implementation should be given more attention

•Effect on the prevention effort is uncertain.



Making labour inspection visits more efficient

•Still under consideration.

•Agreement that measure will reduce administrative burdens and low risk of negative effect on prevention effort

•Good practice examples of “risk-based”approaches from MS could be inspiration for common EU approach.



Improving the guidance for construction site enterprises

•A Guidance document on OSH requirements at temporary or mobile construction sites in preparation

•No negative consequences expected (rather, positive) for the level of OSH



Easing the drafting of risk assessments on health and safety in businesses

•European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (OSHA) is developing interactive on-line risk assessment tool, intended to facilitate risk assessments by SMEs

•No negative impact on OSH but questions raised about usefulness of tool



Improving ways to handle key information on carcinogens

•Review of Directive under way•At this stage not possible to determine effects on OSH level


DIRECT BENEFITS OF OSH COMPLIANCE

•Generally difficult to demonstrate direct link between company investment in OSH and financial benefits

•Direct effects – mostly reduction of costs such as:• reduced sick pay and absenteeism for workers due to accident and illness

• reduced compensation claims• fewer stops in production• lower insurance premiums


INDIRECT – OR INTANGIBLE - EFFECTS

•Benefits can also be considered from an “intangible assets” point of view, such as: •improved company reputation (CSR). • improved organisation of work•good working environment, increased employee satisfaction

•reduced staff turnover


EXAMPLES OF OSH MANAGEMENT WITH POSITIVE ECONOMIC EFFECTS

•Measures to decrease the number of accidents through better organisation of workplaces will often have positive effects on productivity (better workflow, improved co-ordination)

•Improved ergonomics (good work positions), e.g. in offices prevents injuries/pain/strain which might otherwise lower productivity

•Increasing demands to subcontractors / suppliers to avoid low OSH standards which might compromise the company’s reputation


SME’S AND OSH OBLIGATIONS

•The size of companies has significant impact on the extent to which safety management obligations are carried out, and their quality

•Smaller companies less likely to have documented OSH policy or established OSH management system

•“Knowledge-related barriers“ more important in smaller companies: •lack of awareness•lack of expertise•not seeing the benefit of OSH management


QUALITY OF OSH ORGANISATION BY COMPANY SIZE


WHAT CAN BE DONE FOR SME’S?

•Cutting down on OSH obligations may have negative effect on OSH in small companies. Better solution could be

•risk-based approaches based on specific risks associated with sectors and types of companies

•preferably combined with simplied procedures


WHAT CAN BE DONE FOR SME’S, CTD.

•Raising awareness of OSH issues through direct and targeted communication

•Face-to-face communication, safety & health awareness days and using intermediaries (e.g. sector-level organisations, banks, insurers etc.)

•Campaigns need to be adapted to the national context to be effective


EMERGING RISKS

•3 most important groups of new and emerging risks:

•musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), physical inactivity, and multifactor risks

•psychosocial issues•dangerous substances, new technologies, and physical issues

•Incidence of accidents decreasing but work related health problems and diseases increasing

•Majority of these related to new/emerging risks


EMERGING RISKS, CTD.

•MSDs by far the most common work-related health problem

•2nd most common: psychosocial disorders (stress, anxiety) - associated with new working patterns:

•new forms of employment contracts and job insecurity

•ageing and more fragmented workforce•work intensification•poor work–life balance•high emotional demands at work


OTHER EMERGING RISKS

•Other emerging risks associated with e.g. nanotechnologies and biological risks

•Knowledge of their impact (esp nanotech) on health is limited

•Makes it difficult to address the risks.


NEED FOR NEW PREVENTION MEASURES?

•Emerging and new risks largely covered by the existing legislation

•But some new risks, in particular psychosocial, call for new prevention measures.

•Prevention measures need to be flexible to adapt to changing work environment


NEED FOR NEW PREVENTION MEASURES?, CTD.

•Need to cater for both existing and new risks - danger of neglecting “old risks”

•Key element of new prevention measures: active participation of employees through dynamic management systems.

•Many management representatives see psychosocial risks as more difficult to deal with than physical, accident-related risks


POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

•Introduce risk-based approaches adapted to the specific risks associated with sectors and types of companies, preferably combined with simplified procedures for the smallest companies (rather than eliminate requirements).

•More research on business benefits of OSH needed, in particular focusing on SMEs and demonstrating more clearly the benefits

•SMEs should be encouraged to better monitortheir economic performance in relation to OSH


POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS, CTD.

•Differences between national contexts and between sectors must be taken into account –any effort at EU level (such as the ORA tool) necessitates extensive involvement of national stakeholders, in particular the social partners and the national authorities responsible for OSH.

•Awareness campaigns towards SMEs should use direct communication and interaction, e.g. using intermediaries such as sector organisations, banks, insurers etc.


POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS, CTD.

•Traditional OSH tools need to be complementedby strategies and tools aimed at emerging risks arising from changes in the world of work, as well as from innovative technologies

•Priority should be given to informing and guiding enterprises about psychosocial risks and how to tackle them

Documents

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DIRECTIVES ON HEALTH AND … · IMPLEMENTATION OF OSH DIRECTIVES REDUCTION PROPOSALS, CTD. Making labour inspection visits more efficient •Still under consideration