OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE on: the communication from the Commission on a Community programme concerning safety, hygiene and health at work (1996-2000), and the proposal for a Council decision adopting a programme of non-legislative measures to improve health and safety at work
Date: 1995-11-22
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: action programme, health education, occupational disease, occupational health, occupational safety













EUR-Lex - 51995AC1300 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51995AC1300

OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE on: the communication from the Commission on a Community programme concerning safety, hygiene and health at work (1996-2000), and the proposal for a Council decision adopting a programme of non-legislative measures to improve health and safety at work  


Official Journal C 039 , 12/02/1996 P. 0026 





Opinion  on: - the communication from the Commission on a Community programme concerning safety, hygiene and  health at work (1996-2000), and- the proposal for a Council decision adopting a programme of  non-legislative measures to improve health and safety at work(96/C 39/05)On 15  September  1995 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article  198 of the  Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the above-mentioned communication and  proposal. The Section for Social, Family, Educational and Cultural Affairs, which was responsible for  preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 9  November 1995. The  Rapporteur was Mr Pickering. At its 330th Plenary Session (meeting of 22  November 1995), the Economic and Social Committee  adopted the following Opinion unanimously. 1. General comments1.1. The Economic and Social Committee welcomes the general direction  of the Commission programme and proposed Council decision to combat the still unnecessary and  unacceptable numbers of workplace accidents and incidences of occupational diseases throughout the  EU. It is disappointed, however, that the practical objectives of the programme are ambiguous, that  the methods of action are in some instances vague and unclearly costed, and that the case for a  European occupational health and safety 'action' programme has not been convincingly stated,  despite the clear progress achieved through legislative and non-legislative measures under previous  programmes. 1.2. Whilst responding in terms of general orientation to the proposals unanimously recommended by  the Economic and Social Committee and by the Advisory Committee for Safety, Hygiene and Health  Protection at Work in favour of a new programme, the Commission appears hesitant in putting forward  practical 'actions' necessary to implement these proposals. It has drafted a mainly exploratory and  explanatory programme of good intent based essentially on 'awareness', 'investigation', 'analysis'  and 'cooperation'. It has not produced a comprehensive programme of 'action' based on 'concrete  policies and measures for the next few years', as called for by the Committee (). 1.3. The Commission should set its sights higher and achieve instead a balanced policy-mix of  legislative, enforcement and non-legislative actions responding to the real needs and expectations  of workers, employers and self-employed throughout the Community. It should do so with a clearer  set of defined 'priorities', together with 'implementation' and 'normalization' policies, as  proposed by the Committee (). 1.4. Little or no mention is made of Article  118a which is the clear and uncontested Treaty  provision for improving basic health and safety standards at the workplace. The overall objective  of attaining a safe and healthy working environment requires a more vigilant approach. The list of  well-known risks and problems concerning health and safety at work is being extended by new  'agents' and by new technological developments and methods of production for which 'guidance notes'  and 'awareness-raising' activities, whilst important, may not suffice. Basic framework legislation  cannot be ruled out, and indeed should be anticipated if prevention of new occupational accidents  and illness is to be achieved. 1.5. At the same time, rapidly changing shifts in employment patterns need speedily to be  identified and attended to. Existing EU occupational health and safety measures have tended to  focus on production rather than on the service sector, on large rather than on small enterprises.  The growth of the service sector, office employment, home-working and teleworking, and of very  small and owner-managed firms has been somewhat neglected under previous health and safety  programmes. In this latter context, the SAFE programme is to be welcomed, but must be geared to the  real needs of ever-smaller firms - including the self-employed and those engaged in agriculture.  Information and training initiatives are particularly important in this sector, as well as clear  and simple guidelines on occupational health and safety legislation. 1.6. The Committee has consistently registered its concern that the social partners play a full  consultative role in the initiation and implementation of EU occupational health and safety policy.  It has particularly emphasized the key role of the Advisory Committee for Safety, Hygiene and  Health Protection at Work. It is therefore concerned that a plethora of new 'committees' is planned  in the programme and draft decision, appearing to sideline the Advisory Committee and not include  the participation of the Social Partners. There is already a formal decision to establish a  Committee of Senior Labour Inspectors, to examine difficulties of national implementation, and a  Scientific Committee for Occupational Exposure Limits for Chemical Agents. The Commission further  proposes to set up another Advisory Committee of Member States' representatives to assist the  Commission to allocate and evaluate the non-legislative measures (SAFE programme, etc.). Finally  there is a proposal referred to in Commission Decision 88/383 to set up a Group of Experts with a  detailed mandate concerning information exchange of national working environment legislation. In  none of these committees is the participation of the social partners foreseen. The Committee urges  the Commission to ensure that these committees are formed on the recommendation and agreement of  the Advisory Committee for Safety, Hygiene and Health Protection at Work (ACSHH). ACSHH should also  be responsible for making or, as appropriate, agreeing nominations to these committees. At the same  time, the role of the ACSHH is blunted by the absence of legislative measures and by the proposal  that it only 'can' be consulted by the Commission about the non-legislative measures which, for the  moment, constitute the backbone of the 4th Action Programme. This whole approach needs to be  thought out again. 2. Specific comments2.1. Proposal for a Council decision2.1.1. In line with all its previous  Opinions on the subject, the Committee would strongly urge the Commission to introduce a balanced  'policy mix' of legislative, enforcement and non-legislative measures to improve health and safety  at work. Article  1 and subsequent Articles, as well as the title of the 'action programme', should  be amended accordingly. 2.1.2. The role of the ACSHH should be better highlighted in this context, both in the drawing-up  of effective framework legislation geared to the needs of workers and the abilities of employers,  and in playing a full part in validating selection criteria for projects and support organizations  under the SAFE programme and other non-legislative measures proposed under the 'action' programme.  In line with the important role that ACSHH has to play in the development and maintenance of the  4th Programme of Work there must be no diminution in the membership of the Committee and  representation must reflect the widening European Union. To this end the limited budget and  resources of ACSHH must be speedily attended to, and reflect its operating needs and those of the  relevant DGs. In particular, it must be made clear in the penultimate 'whereas' of the draft  decision that the Advisory Committee 'must' be consulted by the Commission on the drawing-up of  proposals in this field. 2.2. Action programme2.2.1. Action 1: Guidance notes and core information material on legislationThe Committee would once  again stress that EU support for SMEs in the field of occupational health and safety requires  further resourcing. The Commission has apparently ignored the Committee's proposal to develop the  role of 'intermediaries', especially those which can directly operate between the regulating  authorities and small firms at the workplace level. A clearer reference should be made in  particular to 'individuals and entities which operate between regulating authorities and SMEs such  as trade and employers organizations, training institutions, banks, insurance companies, suppliers  and main contractors' (). 2.2.2. Action 2: Information, education and training on non-legislative measures2.2.2.1. The Commission  has not sufficiently set out the need for a 'uniform' system of reporting on occupational accidents  and safety and health, as urged by the Committee () (also see point 2.2.5). 2.2.2.2. The Commission's commitment to the 'development of comprehensive occupational safety and  health studies' at school and in further education, as proposed by the Committee is unclear. The  Commission should also recognise that occupational health and safety studies should be ongoing  throughout a person's working life. This needs to be reflected in the Programme of Work. The  Commission should at least lay down guidelines concerning for example: - the introduction of safety and health protection in the school curricula throughout the  Community; - adequate preparation of teaching personnel who should implement this; - the promotion of pedagogical research and the developing of new teaching aids; - preventive safety and health awareness in schools through channels of communication which are  accessible to and appropriate for young people; - the linkage of these general education programmes with work experience programmes; - promotion of liaison between business and establishments of further education to assist in the  education of the work force in health, safety and hygiene; - identify professions with responsibility in the workplace for health and safety, and seek the  development of health and safety elements or modules in the training of these people by  universities, colleges and those institutions offering training in the professions. 2.2.2.3. Occupational health and safety training rights should not be relegated to exclusively  'non-legislative' measures, contrary to the Article  118a Framework Directive provisions and the  Committee's own-initiative proposal on the subject. In particular, the Commission should take on  board the Committee's recommendation to 'develop Community-wide training standards e.g. for  occupational safety and health professionals, or for certain high-risk occupations' (). 2.2.3. Action 3: The emergence of new health and safety risks2.2.3.1. The Commission proposal refers to  'monitoring of the state of health of the workforce'. It should be made clear that it is primarily  the working environment that requires monitoring. 2.2.3.2. The Commission states that it intends only to initiate investigation for occupational  health and safety problems which have already been well acknowledged such as work-related stress  and violence in the workplace. The Committee urges the Commission to incorporate in the Programme  the unanimously agreed Opinion of the Committee given in  April 1994 which, on the question of  legislation, stated that: 'There must be a review of the existing body of Community occupational safety and health  legislation to see which major risk issues are still not addressed by specific Directives. Some  examples, on which the Commission must take action, can be indicated right away: - accidents related to transport at the work site; - upper limb disorders, related to repetitive work; - work related stress; and- prevention of violence at work (experienced by workers who, by the  nature of their job, come in contact with the public, as well as regarding problems such as sexual  and racial harassment at work, bullying and verbal abuse).'The question of screen work (visual  display units, monitors, etc.) and of the worrying increase of accidents involving young people at  the workplace should also be the subject of further urgent analysis and action, including their  health and safety insurance rights. 2.2.4. Action 4: The SAFE programme (Safety Actions for Europe)As stated earlier, the SAFE programme and  its 'consultative mechanism' must better relate to the existing Advisory Committee for Safety,  Hygiene and Health Protection at Work and to the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living  and Working Conditions. It should compliment, not by-pass, the existing role and responsibilities  of the social partners in the Member States. 2.2.5. Action 5: Correct implementation by Member States of the Community legislation already  adopted2.2.5.1. It is of vital importance that existing directives are implemented in all Member  States. It is in the interest of the employees and to the benefit of fair competition between  Member States. 2.2.5.2. The 'infringement proceedings' which the Commission envisages in cases of non-compliance  need to be stated more clearly and convincingly. 2.2.5.3. The Commission should take up the Committee's suggestion to admit workers' and employers'  observers in the 'Group of Senior Labour Inspectors'. 2.2.5.4. In stimulating the 'definition of common principles of labour inspection in the field of  health and safety at work', the Commission should also envisage a 'uniform system of reporting on  occupational accidents and safety and health'. (See point 2.2.2.)2.2.6. Action 6: Progress the Commission proposals already madeThe Committee endorses this action. 2.2.7. Action 7: Review of Community LegislationAs underlined in earlier Opinions of the Committee,  consolidation of legislative texts ought to involve simplification of standards without any  lowering of standards or diluting of existing requirements (). 2.2.8. Action 8: New proposals for high risk activities, or for certain categories of workers. The Committee welcomes the Commission's attention to the health and safety needs of the  self-employed. The Commission should check to include the self-employed in existing and future EU  health and safety provisions, where appropriate. 2.2.9. Action 9: Improved coherence among Commission activitiesThe Committee has consistently called for  an integrated strategy and has highlighted the question of 'multidisciplinary preventive services'  as a 'priority'. The Committee considers that the Commission should ensure inclusion of public  health within this area and not just the occupational health services. The Commission must ensure  that there is adequate and suitable liaison between the DGs concerned with these areas. 2.2.10. Action 10: Links with those third countries which have Association Agreements with the European  CommunityThe Committee endorses this action. 2.2.11. Action 11: Improved system of cooperation in the European Union and internationallyThe Committee  endorses this action. Done at Brussels, 22  November 1995. The Presidentof the Economic and Social CommitteeCarlos FERRER() OJ No C  195, 18. 7. 1994, p. 88, point 1.1.  () OJ No C 195, 18. 7. 1994, p. 88, points 1.5, 1.6, 2.4.1.2, 2.5.  () OJ No C 195, 18. 7. 1994, p. 88, point 2.3.4.  () OJ No C 95, 18. 7. 1994, p. 88, point 2.4.4.1.  () OJ No C 95, 18. 7. 1994, p. 88, point 2.4.3.4.  () OJ No C 195, 18. 7. 1994, point 2.4.1.5.