COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions EU strategic framework on health and safety at work 2021-2027 Occupational safety and health in a changing world of work
Date: 2021-06-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, European Commission
Subjects: EU strategy, incapacity for work, labour law, occupational accident, occupational disease, occupational health, workplace

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 28.6.2021  SWD(2021) 148 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT   Accompanying the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions EU strategic framework on health and safety at work 2021-2027      Occupational safety and health in a changing world of work       {COM(2021) 323 final} - {SWD(2021) 149 final}  
 
 
Table of Contents 

1. 

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 2 

Purpose............................................................................................................................ 2 

Background ..................................................................................................................... 3 

2.  CONTEXT .................................................................................................................. 4 

3.  TAKING 

STOCK  OF 

THE 
IMPLEMENTATION  OF  THE  EU  STRATEGIC  FRAMEWORK  ON 
HEALTH AND SAFETY AT WORK 2014-2020 ................................................... 10 

THE  ACHIEVEMENTS 

IN 

3.1. Context 

 .......................................................................................... 11 

3.2. Approach and methodology ................................................................................... 13 

3.3. Implementation and quality of the strategic framework (by key objective) .......... 13 

3.4. Relevance, effectiveness, coherence and EU added value. ................................... 39 

3.5. Conclusions 

 .......................................................................................... 42 

3.6. Recommendations identified in the stocktaking exercise ...................................... 43 

4.  ASSESSMENT OF THE NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS .............. 45 

4.1. Context 

 .......................................................................................... 45 

4.2. Measures  to  achieve the key objectives of the EU strategic framework on health 
and safety at work 2014-2020 in national implementation reports .............................. 46 

4.3. Overview  and analysis on how Member States have transposed/implemented the 
 .......................................................................................... 53 
different OSH directives 

4.4. Conclusions from the assessment of the national implementations reports .......... 57 

5.  CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................... 58 

Annex 1: List of Acronyms .......................................................................................... 59 

Annex  2:  List  of  Directives  covered  by  the  national  practical  implementation  reports 
for the period from 2013 to 2017 .................................................................................. 60 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Purpose 

This  staff  working  document  supports  the  Communication  on  the  EU  strategic 
framework  on  health  and  safety  at  work  2021-20271  and  complements  it  by  additional 
information. It takes stock of the achievements in the implementation of the EU strategic 
framework on health and safety at work 2014-20202.  

The  introduction  to  this  document  describes  the  actions  taken  to  take  stock  of  the 
previous Framework and the input of the various opinion and studies. Chapter 2 gives an 
overview of the context of the occupational health and safety (OSH) policy and its links 
with other policies of the EU. Chapter 3 of this document presents the main results of the 
stocktaking exercise stemming, among others, from an external study contracted by the 
Commission,  carried  out  during  2020-2021.  Chapter  4  presents  an  assessment  of  the 
practical implementation of the Framework Directive 89/391/EEC on Safety and Health 
of Workers at Work3 (further on referred to as Framework Directive) and 23 related EU 
directives  (see  Annex  2)  for  the  period  2013-2017.  The  assessment  is  based,  among 
others,  on  the  national  implementation  reports  transmitted  by  the  Member  States  in 
accordance  with  Article  17a  of  the  Framework  Directive,  Article  22  of  Directive 
2009/148/EC4; Article 10a of Directive 91/383/EEC5; Article 9a of  Directive 92/29/EEC6 
and Article 17a of Directive 94/33/EC7 as well as on the analysis made in the context of 
the above-mentioned external study.   

1 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic 
and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions “EU strategic framework on health and safety at 
work 2021-2027 – Occupational safety and health in a changing world of work”, COM (2021) 323/2 
2 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic 
and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  on  an  EU  Strategic  Framework  on  Health  and 
Safety at Work 2014-2020, COM (2014) 332 
3  Council  Directive  89/391/EEC  of  12  June  1989  on  the  introduction  of  measures  to  encourage 
improvements in the safety and health of workers at work, OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1 
4  Directive  2009/148/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  30  November  2009  on  the 
protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work, OJ L 330, 16.12.2009, p. 28 
5 Council Directive 91/383/EEC of 25 June 1991 supplementing the measures to encourage improvements 
in the safety and health at work of workers with a fixed-duration employment relationship or a temporary 
employment relationship, OJ L 206, 29.7.1991, p. 19  
6  Council  Directive  92/29/EEC  of  31  March  1992  on  the  minimum  safety  and  health  requirements  for 
improved medical treatment on board vessels, OJ L 113, 30.4.1992, p.19 
7  Council  Directive  94/33/EC  of  22  June  1994  on  the  protection  of  young  people  at  work,  OJ  L  216, 
20.8.1994, p. 12  

2 

 
 
 
                                                           
Background  

In June 2014, the European Commission adopted the Communication on an EU strategic 
framework on health and safety at work 2014-2020. The strategic framework provided a 
policy framework for the improvement of OSH at both national and European level and a 
roadmap  for  stakeholders  to  play  their  role  in  the  implementation  of  the  objectives 
identified by the strategic framework.   

Based  on  an  identification  of  the  outstanding  problems  and  major  challenges,  the 
Communication  sets  out  seven  key  strategic  objectives  and  a  range  of  actions  for 
promoting workers’ health and safety, namely:  

  Further consolidate national strategies;   
  Facilitate  compliance  with  OSH  legislation,  particularly  by  micro  and  small 

enterprises; 

  Better enforcement of OSH legislation by Member States;  
  Simplify existing legislation;  
  Address  the  ageing  of  the  workforce,  emerging  new  risks,  prevention  of  work-

related and occupational diseases;  
Improve statistical data collection and develop the information base;  

 
  Better  coordinate  EU  and  international  efforts  to  address  OSH  and  engage  with 

international organisations.  

Moreover,  in  January  2017,  the  Commission  adopted  the  Communication  “Safer  and 
healthier  work  for  all  -  modernisation  of  the  EU  occupational  safety  and  health 
legislation and policy”8, which took stock of the progress made in the implementation of 
the  EU  strategic  framework  and  confirmed  the  main  objectives  when  setting  three 
priority actions in this policy area: 

1)        Step  up  the  fight  against  occupational  cancer  through  legislative  proposals 
accompanied by increased guidance and awareness-raising; 

2)        Help  businesses,  in  particular  micro-enterprises  and  small  and  medium-sized 
enterprises (SMEs), comply with OSH rules; 

3)        Cooperate  with  Member  States  and  social  partners  to  remove  or  update  outdated 
rules  and  to  refocus  efforts  on  ensuring  better  and  broader  protection,  compliance  and 
enforcement on the ground. 

The EU strategic framework on health and safety at work 2014-2020 has recently ended. 
Its  successful  implementation  is  acknowledged by  all stakeholders and it had the broad 
support from governments and social partners. The main EU consultative bodies in this 
area  –  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Safety  and  Health  at  Work  (ACSH)  adopted  an 

8 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic 
and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  -  Safer  and  Healthier  Work  for  All  - 
Modernisation of the EU Occupational Safety and Health Legislation and Policy, COM/2017/012 final 

3 

 
                                                           
Opinion in 2019 on Future Priorities of EU OSH Policy”9.  In the opinion, the Committee 
stated: “The adoption of a strategic approach to OSH policy has played a pivotal role in 
the way Member States have defined objectives and priorities of their action in the area 
of OSH”. It also noted that “an important role has been played by the EU OSH strategic 
framework of 2014, which identified the further consolidation of national OSH strategies 
as  one  of  its  priorities.  Meanwhile  26  Member  States  have  adopted  or  renewed  their 
national  strategies  or  comparable  multiannual  programmes  as  a  result  of 
the 
implementation of the EU strategic framework”. 

The Senior Labour Inspectors’ Committee (SLIC) has also provided valuable insights in 
their opinion on  “Future EU OSH enforcement priorities contributing to  a renewed EU 
OSH  strategy”  in  October  202010  containing  relevant  recommendations  as  regards 
enforcement aspects.   

The Commission contracted an external  study11 and carried out  a public consultation  in 
2020-202112 to have a complete overview of the previous framework. More information 
about the results of the stakeholder consultation and open public consultation is available 
in the Staff Working Document – Stakeholder consultation-Synopsis report12. The results 
of the study are described in the chapter 3.  

In  addition,  as  part  of  the  stocktaking  exercise,  the  national  practical  implementation 
reports,  covering  the  period  2013  to  2017,  that  the  Member  States  sent  to  the 
Commission,  were  analysed.  The  results  of  this  stocktaking  exercise  were  used  for  the 
preparation of the Communication on a new EU strategic framework on health and safety 
at work 2021-20271, which this document accompanies.  

2.  CONTEXT 

The EU Treaties13 and the Charter of Fundamental Rights14 place protection of workers’ 
health  and  safety  as  an  important  part  of  the  economy  that  works  for  people.  The 
European Pillar of Social Rights principle 10 lays down that workers have the right to a 

9  Advisory  Committee  on  Safety  and  Health  at  Work,  Opinion,  Towards  better  health  and  safety  in  the 
workplace - Opinion on Future Priorities of EU OSH Policy, Doc.1048/19, Adopted on 04/06/2019. 
10 The Senior Labour Inspectors Committee opinion “Future EU OSH enforcement priorities contributing 
to a renewed EU OSH Strategy”, adopted  on 21 October 2020 
11 European Commission (2021): ‘Study to support the evaluation of the EU Strategic Framework on health 
and safety at work 2014-2020 – Final Report’. 
12 SWD(2021) 149/2. 

13 https://europa.eu/european-union/law/treaties_en 

14 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, OJ C 326, 26.10.2012, p. 391 

4 

 
 
                                                           
high level of protection of their health and safety at work. The new strategic framework 
is a key deliverable in the action plan15 implementing the Pillar.  

OSH is multifactorial policy, which has interface and synergies with many policy areas. 
This chapter provides an overview of the interlinkages between OSH and other relevant 
EU  policies,  complementing  the  Communication  on  the  EU  strategic  framework  on 
health and safety at work1 by additional information as well as the available support for 
OSH related actions in Member States.  

EU chemicals strategy for sustainability 

On  14  October  2020,  the  Commission  adopted  the  EU  chemicals  strategy  for 
sustainability16, which aims to increase protection of human health and the environment 
against hazardous chemicals, and boost innovation for safe and sustainable chemicals. It 
is part of the EU’s zero pollution ambition, which is a key commitment of the European 
Green Deal.  

The new EU chemicals strategy recognises the fundamental role of chemicals for human 
well-being  and  for  the  green  and  digital  transition  of  European  economy  and  society. 
However, it also points out the need to address the health and environmental challenges 
caused by the most harmful chemicals. To this regard, the chemicals strategy identified 
the  need  to  strengthen  protection  of  workers  by  proposing  to  lower  the  existing  limit 
values for lead and asbestos and to establish  a binding limit  value for diisocyanates.  In 
2020, the Commission services already launched the preparatory work to carry out these 
actions. Moreover, in the meantime, further action on cobalt has been envisaged. 

The chemicals strategy also stresses the importance to further strengthen the protection of 
workers; actions in this regard are included in the EU strategic framework on health and 
safety at work 2021-20271.  

In  particular,  the  Commission  will  further  streamline  the  interface  between  OSH  and 
chemicals legislation such as REACH17, and CLP regulations18. This will be done in the 
first  place  by  implementing  actions  in  the  framework  of  the  “one  substance,  one 

15  More  information  is  available  under  the  following  link:  https://op.europa.eu/webpub/empl/european-
pillar-of-social-rights/en/ 
16 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic 
and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability- Towards 
a Toxic-Free Environment, COM/2020/667 final 
17  Regulation  (EC)  No  1907/2006  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  18  December  2006 
concerning  the  Registration,  Evaluation,  Authorisation  and  Restriction  of  Chemicals  (REACH), 
establishing  a  European  Chemicals  Agency,  amending  Directive  1999/45/EC  and  repealing  Council 
Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 
76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC, OJ L 396, 
30.12.2006, p. 1 
18 Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on 
classification,  labelling  and  packaging  of  substances  and  mixtures,  amending  and  repealing  Directives 
67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, OJ L 353, 31.12.2008, p. 1 

5 

 
                                                           
assessment”  process  announced  in  the  chemicals  strategy.  This  should  lead  to  a  better 
and  more  transparent  planning  of  initiatives  and  co-ordination  between  the  two 
legislative areas. 

Moreover,  in  the  planned  impact  assessments  for  the  revision  of  REACH  and  CLP 
regulations, the Commission plans to identify and assess options to align the derived no-
effect  levels  (DNELs)  with  the  occupational  exposure  limits  (OELs).  All  these 
assessments will be carried out in close collaboration with stakeholders (including the tri-
partite  OSH  stakeholders),  involving  the  relevant  expert  groups,  including  the  one 
substance-one  assessment  expert  working  group  announced  in  the  chemicals  strategy. 
Where appropriate, legislative proposals may be made to implement the outcome of those 
assessments.  

Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan 

In February 2021, the Commission presented its Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan19. Every 
year, 3.5 million people in the EU are diagnosed with cancer, and 1.3 million die from it. 
The  Cancer  Plan,  which  follows  President  von  der  Leyen’s  commitment  to  step  up  the 
fight  against  cancer,  aims  to  reduce  the  cancer  burden  for  patients,  their  families  and 
health systems. 

The  Commission  is  developing,  together  with  the  Joint  Research  Centre  (JRC),  the 
Cancer Inequalities Registry. It will identify trends, disparities and inequalities between 
Member  States  and  regions.  Alongside  regular  qualitative  assessments  of  the  country-
specific  situation,  the  registry  will  identify  challenges  and  specific  areas  of  action  to 
guide  investment  and  interventions  at  EU,  national  and  regional  level  under  Europe’s 
Beating Cancer Plan. 

Europe’s  Beating  Cancer  Plan  identified  several  flagship  initiatives  and  supporting 
actions from a broad range of policy areas, including health and safety at work. 

Cancer is the first cause of work-related death in the EU20, contributing to an estimated 
100  000  occupational  cancer  deaths  in  the  workplace  every  year.  As  part  of  Europe’s 
Beating Cancer Plan, the Commission has proposed to update Directive 2004/37/EC on 
Carcinogens and Mutagens at Work21 and Directive 2009/148/EC on Asbestos at Work4, 
with  the  aim  to  further  improve  the  protection  of  workers  from  the  exposure  to 
carcinogenic substances. Since 2016, the Commission has proposed four amendments of 
the  Carcinogens  and  Mutagens  Directive19.  The  European  Parliament  and  the  Council 

19  Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council:  Europe's  Beating 
Cancer Plan, SWD (2021)13 final 
20  EU-OSHA  (2017),  An  international  comparison  of  the  cost  of  work-related  accidents  and  illnesses, 
available  at:  https://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/international-comparison-cost-work-related-accidents-
and-illnesses/view 
21 Directive 2004/37/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the protection 
of workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens or mutagens at work (sixth individual directive 
within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC, OJ L 229, 29.6.2004, p.23.  

6 

 
                                                           
have already adopted three of them. The fourth proposal, adopted by the Commission on 
22  September  2020,  is  currently  being  discussed  following  the  ordinary  legislative 
procedure.  

As  regards  to  the  update  of  the  Asbestos  at  Work  Directive,  the  Commission  services 
launched the preparatory work in 2020. The related actions are also included in the EU 
strategic framework on health and safety at work 2021-20271.  

Gender mainstreaming  

According  to  Eurofound’s  report  “Living,  working  and  COVID-19”22,  based  on  an  e-
survey carried out in April and July 2020, women face a disproportionate impact during 
the pandemic. The pandemic has affected their work–life balance more than that of men, 
their working time was more reduced and  young women were more likely to lose their 
job  than  men  were.  Women’s  responsibilities  of  care  increased  during  the  pandemic. 
Research23 shows that teleworking full-time may blur the boundaries between work and 
private  life,  can  impose  challenges  for  work-life  balance  and  is  perceived  differently 
depending on gender. 

Although inequalities still exist and the pandemic seems to have had an impact on gender 
equality, the EU has made significant progress in this area over the last decades. A Union 
of Equality is one of the priority areas  of the Commission, the gender equality strategy 
2020-202524 adopted in March 2020 being part of it. The key objectives of this strategy 
are ending gender-based violence, including harassment; challenging gender stereotypes; 
closing  gender gaps in  the labour  market; achieving equal  participation across different 
sectors of the economy; addressing the gender pay and pension gaps; closing the gender 
care gap and achieving gender balance in decision-making and in politics. The strategy 
pursues  a dual  approach of gender mainstreaming combined with  targeted actions. One 
key  deliverable  of  the  strategy  is  a  legislative  proposal  on  preventing  and  combatting 
gender-based  violence  against  women  and  domestic  violence.  In  light  of  data,  women 
continue to be disproportionately affected by gender-based and sexual harassment.  

As to OSH, there is evidence that work-related risks to women’s safety and health have 
been underestimated and that a gender-neutral approach has contributed to less attention 
and resources being directed towards the prevention of work-related risks experienced by 
women. It is therefore important to continue  gender mainstreaming in OSH. One of the 
general  principles  of  prevention  laid  down  in  the  Framework  Directive  is  to  adapt  the 
work to the individual. This also means taking account of the specific characteristics of 

Living, 

(2020), 

Eurofound 

22 
https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2020/living-working-and-covid-19 
23  Telework,  work  organisation  and  job  quality  during  the  COVID-19  crisis  A  qualitative  study 
https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/sites/jrcsh/files/jrc122591.pdf 
24 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic 
and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A Union of Equality: Gender Equality Strategy 
2020-2025, COM(2020) 152 final 

working 

COVID-19,  

and 

7 

 
                                                           
women in terms of health and safety at work and reflecting them in risk assessment and 
the 
preventive  measures.  The  very 
Communication on the EU strategic framework on health and safety at work 2021-20271 
to mainstream gender and promote gender awareness in OSH.  

important  gender  aspect 

is  reflected 

in 

Strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities  

In  March  2021,  the  Commission  adopted  the  strategy  for  the  rights  of  persons  with 
disabilities  2021-203025.  The  objective  of  this  Strategy  is  to  progress  towards  ensuring 
that  all  persons  with  disabilities  in  Europe,  enjoy  their  human  rights,  have  equal 
opportunities and access to participate in society and economy, are able to decide where, 
how and with whom they live, move freely in the EU regardless of their support needs 
and  no  longer  experience  discrimination.  This  new  and  strengthened  strategy  takes 
account of the diversity of disability comprising long-term physical, mental, intellectual 
or sensory impairments, which are often invisible. The new strategy therefore contains an 
ambitious  set  of  actions  and  flagship  initiatives  in  various  domains  and  has  numerous 
priorities, such as accessibility, having a decent quality of life and to live independently, 
equal participation and equal opportunities, among other important aspects. 

Ensuring  and  promoting  health  and  safety  at  work  is  essential  to  reduce  risks  of 
disabilities  and  mental  health  problems  during  working  life  and  to  improve  the 
reintegration  of  workers  with  disabilities.  Safe  and  healthy  workplaces  contribute  to 
avoiding disabilities by preventing work-related diseases and accidents at work. Ensuring 
good working conditions and sound OSH is important for all workers, including the ones 
with  disabilities.  The  EU  OSH  legislation  (namely,  the  Framework  Directive)  put  on 
employers  the  obligation  to  adapt  the  work  to  the  individual,  especially  as  regards  the 
design  of  workplaces,  the  choice  of  work  equipment  and  the  choice  of  working  and 
production  methods.  The  right  implementation  of  these  principles  contributes  to 
facilitating  the  employability  of  persons  with  disabilities.  Carrying  out  a  diversity-
sensitive risk assessment also contributes to ensuring OSH for all workers.  

EU available support for OSH related actions in Member States 

Various  actions  are  foreseen  in  the  area  of  OSH  in  the  Communication  on  the  EU 
strategic  framework  on  health  and  safety  at  work  2021-20271,  to  be  accomplished  by 
Member States. To achieve these actions, Members States can make use of the available 
resources at the EU level.  

In 2020, the EU not only used its 2020 budget effectively but also agreed its new long-
term budget for 2021-2027 (€1 074 billion in 2018 prices), reinforced by the temporary 

25 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic 
and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions;  Union  of  Equality:  Strategy  for  the  Rights  of 
Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030, COM(2021) 101 final 

8 

 
                                                           
recovery instrument,  NextGenerationEU  (additional €750 billion in  2018 prices)26. This 
stimulus  package  of  €1.8  trillion27,  the  largest  ever  financed  by  the  EU  budget,  will 
provide the necessary scale and ambition to help repair the economic and social damage 
caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and lay the  foundations  for a greener, more digital 
and  more  resilient  EU. The  available  resources  at  EU  level  include  the following  main 
elements: 

  The  EU  has  set  a  target  of  50%  or  more  of  the  total  amount  of  the  long-term 
budget, including NextGenerationEU, to be used to support the modernisation of 
the  European  Union  through  research  and  innovation;  fair  climate  and  digital 
transitions; preparedness, recovery and resilience. 

  32%  of  the  long-term  budget  will  be  used  to  accelerate  the  achievement  of  the 

new and reinforced priorities, the highest share ever.   

  The  EU  has  set  a  target  of  spending  at  least  30%  of  the  long-term  budget  and 

NextGenerationEU on climate action.  

  The EU will work towards the goal of spending 10% of the long-term budget in 

2026 and 2027 on halting and reversing the decline in biodiversity. 

 

In  order  to  contribute  to  the  digital  transformation,  the  EU  will  work  to  invest 
20% of the Recovery and Resilience Facility funds in this area.  

  30% of NextGenerationEU financing will be raised through green bonds. 

The majority of funds from NextGenerationEU (€672.5 billion) will be spent through the 
recovery and resilience facility (RRF). The RRF consists of large-scale financial support 
to public investments and areas. Each Member State will have to include a minimum of 
37% of expenditure related to climate and 20% to digital in their national recovery plan.  

A  new  initiative,  REACT-EU,  will  provide  a  top-up  for  cohesion  support  to  Member 
States  for  2014-2020  programmes  extending  the  options  for  Member  States  to  finance 
crisis response and crisis repair measures, with a budget of €47.5 billion. It will support 
workers and SMEs, health systems, the green and digital transitions, and it be available 
across sectors –from tourism to culture. 

A  new  standalone  EU4Health  programme  has  been  adopted28,  with  a  budget  of  €2.17 
billion  (2018  prices),  and  an  additional  allocation  of  EUR  2.9  billion  (2018  prices)  as 
programme-specific  adjustment  provided  for  in  Article  5  of  Council  Regulation 

information 

the  following 

is  available  under 

26  More 
budget/long-term-eu-budget/2021-2027_en 
27 More information is available under the following link: https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/recovery-plan-
europe_en  
28 Regulation (EU) 2021/522 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 March 2021 establishing 
a Programme for the Union’s action in the  field of health (‘EU4Health Programme) for the period 2021-
2027, and repealing Regulation (EU) No 282/2014, OJ L 107, 26.3.2021, p. 1 

link:  https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/eu-

9 

 
                                                           
2020/2093.    It  will  invest  in  prevention,  crisis  preparedness,  the  procurement  of  vital  
medicines and  equipment in health emergency situations, as well as improving long-term 
health  outcomes.  A  number  of  other  key  programmes  will  be  reinforced  to    learn  the 
lessons from the crisis, notably rescEU29 and Horizon Europe30. 

EU’s social dimension has been strengthened with a renewed European Social Fund, the 
European  Social  Fund  Plus  (ESF+),  and  a  strengthened  and  more  effective  European 
Globalisation  Adjustment  Fund  for  Displaced  Workers  (EGF)31.  For  the  period  2021-
2027, the ESF+ will be worth €88 billion (in 2018 prices) and the EGF €1.6 billion. Both 
are geared to invest in people: ensuring they are equipped with the right skills needed to 
deal  with  challenges  and  changes  on  the  labour  market,  following  up  on  the  European 
Pillar  of  Social  Rights32.  These  investments  in  people  will  be  complemented  by 
investments by the European Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund in, for 
example,  infrastructure,  enhanced  connectivity,  including  ICT  connectivity,  innovative 
and  smart  economic  transformation  and  solutions  for  greener  and  low-carbon  economy 
and in safer environments including for OSH. 

3.  TAKING  STOCK  OF  THE  ACHIEVEMENTS  IN  THE  IMPLEMENTATION  OF  THE  EU 
STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK ON HEALTH AND SAFETY AT WORK 2014-2020 

As  mentioned  earlier,  the  implementation  of  the  previous  strategic  framework  has 
triggered  comprehensive  action  from  Member  States,  which  have  adopted  or  renewed 
their  national  strategies  or  comparable  multiannual  programmes.  Impressive  progress 
was achieved in the implementation of both the strategic framework 2014-20202 and the 
above-mentioned 2017 Communication8, with a high number of actions achieved, and in 
particular,  through  the  adoption  of  three  updates  of  the  Carcinogens  and  Mutagens 
Directive19 improving working conditions for millions of workers in the EU. As a result, 
the  exposure  to  these  substances  is  now  lower,  and  the  protection  of  these  workers’ 
health has significantly improved. 

The  independent  external  study  carried  out  during  2020-202111  provided  relevant 
information  and  evidence  to  take  stock  of  these  achievements  at  both  EU  and  national 
level, highlighting also the contributions by the European Agency for Safety and Health 
at Work (EU-OSHA) to the implementation of the 2014-2020 framework2.  

information 

is  available  under 

29  More 
protection/resceu_en  
30  More  information  is  available  under  the  following  link:  https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-
innovation/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe_en  
31 More information is available under the following link:  

link:  https://ec.europa.eu/echo/what/civil-

the  following 

 https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=86&langId=en 
32More 
https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&furtherNews=yes&newsId=9939. 

information 

available 

under 

the 

is 

following 

link: 

10 

 
 
                                                           
Based  on  this  study  and  on  other  available  information,  the  main  results  are  described 
below.  

3.1.  Context 

The  EU  strategic  framework  on  health  and  safety  at  work  2014-20202  identified  seven 
strategic  objectives.  Each  of  them  was  to  be  pursued  through  key  actions  to  be 
implemented  by  different  actors  active  in  the  field  of  OSH.  These  actors  are,  among 
others,  the  Commission,  the  Member  States,  the  social  partners,  SLIC  and  EU-OSHA. 
Table  1  provides  an  overview  of  the  different  strategic  objectives,  as  well  as  the  key 
actions and the actors identified as responsible for each action. 

Table 1: Summary of actions and actors in the EU OSH strategic framework 2014-
202033 

Strategic objective  Action 

Responsible actor(s)* 

EC 

Member 
States 

ACSH 
(Tripartite 
Structure) 

SLIC 

EU-OSHA 

Others 

1. 
Further  
consolidate  national  
strategies 

Review national OSH strategies  

X 

(X) 

Establish  a  database  of  national 
strategies 

Nominate contact points for national 
strategies 

Provide 
technical 
financial  and 
support  on  implementing  OIRA  and 
other IT-based tools  

Develop  guidance  and 
examples of good practice 

identify 

Promote 
practice 

the  exchange  of  good 

Continue  with  awareness  raising 
campaigns 

Map 
resources 
inspectorates  and  evaluate 
capacity  

of 

labour 
their 

Evaluate 
programme  of 
enhance tools for cooperation  

exchange/training 
inspectors, 

labour 

Assess  effectiveness  of  sanctions 
and fines imposed by MS 

Identify  simplifications  /  reductions 
of  burden,  promote  debate  with 
stakeholders 

to 
Encourage  Member  States 
specific 
identify 
sources 
regulatory 
promote 
burden, 
exchange  of  good  practice  and 
information 

of 

2. 
compliance 
OSH legislation 

Facilitate 
with 

3. 
Better 
enforcement of OSH 
legislation 
by 
Member States 

4.  Simplify  existing 
legislation 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

(X) 

X 

X 

X 

(X) 

(x) 

X 

(X) 

X 

(X) 

(X) 

(X) 

(X) 

(X) 

X 

X 

(X) 

(X) 

(X) 

X 

33 The actors marked as responsible in this table reflect those referenced explicitly within the EU strategic 
framework, and do not consider other actors who may have been implicated in the actual implementation 
of specific actions 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Strategic objective  Action 

Responsible actor(s)* 

EC 

Member 
States 

ACSH 
(Tripartite 
Structure) 

SLIC 

EU-OSHA 

Others 

5.  Address  ageing 
workforce, emerging 
risks,  work-
new 
related 
and 
occupational 
diseases 

6. 
statistical 
collection 
develop 
information base 

Improve 
data 
and 
the 

Assess 
enterprises in low-risk sectors 

the  situation  of  micro-

Establish  a  network  of  OSH 
professionals and scientists 

Support  the  dissemination  of  the 
findings  of 
the  European  Risk 
Observatory 

Identify and exchange good practice 
on ways to improve OSH conditions 
for specific categories of workers 

Promote 
reintegration measures  

rehabilitation 

and 

Identify  and  disseminate  good 
practice  on  mental  health  problems 
at work 

Assess  and  improve  the  quality  of 
data on accidents at work (ESAW) 

Examine options to improve data on 
occupational diseases at EU level  

Launch discussions within ACSH on 
a 
on 
occupational exposures 

database 

common 

options 

Examine 
improve 
information on costs and benefits in 
the area of OSH34 

to 

tool 

Develop  a 
the 
implementation  of  the  EU  strategic 
framework 2014-2020 

to  monitor 

Continue 
countries 
negotiations 

to  support  candidate 
accession 

during 

7.  Better  coordinate 
EU and international 
efforts 
to  address 
OSH  and  engage 
international 
with 
organisations 

Strengthen  OSH  cooperation  with 
the ILO, WHO and OECD 

the  Memorandum 

Review 
of 
Understanding  (MoU)  with  the  ILO 
to better reflect OSH policy 

to 

Contribute 
implementing  OSH 
commitments  in  EU  free-trade  and 
investment agreements  

Address  OSH  deficits  in  the  global 
supply  chain  and  contribute  to  G20 
initiatives  

Strengthen  ongoing  cooperation 
and dialogue on OSH with strategic 
partners 
* X = leading role; (X) = supporting role 

(X) 

X 

(X) 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

Source: Commission Communication COM (2014) 332 

34 No actor was explicitly identified as responsible for implementation of this action within the EU strategic 
framework 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
3.2.  Approach and methodology  

The  stocktaking  of  the  2014-2020  framework  is  based  mainly  on  the  results  of  an 
independent  external  study.  Other  sources  of  information  were  also  used,  such  as  the 
opinions  of  the  ACSH35  and  SLIC36,  the  Council  conclusions37,  the  results  of  the  open 
public consultation12 launched on 7 December 2020, the contributions from stakeholders 
as well as hearings in the European Parliament and with social partners. 

The external study11 entailed a thorough assessment of the actions carried out by different 
actors  as  well  as  their  effects  and  impacts.  It  gathered  evidence  on  the  strategic 
framework’s design, its implementation at both EU and Member State level38, and on its 
contribution to generating impacts in line with its objective. The evidence was gathered 
via  a  range  of  methods  and  tools,  including  more  than  100  interviews  with  relevant 
stakeholders, a public consultation, and the review of a wide range of secondary sources 
including  policy  documents  and  legislation,  official  statistics,  monitoring  data  and 
relevant literature.  

3.3. 

Implementation  and  quality  of  the  strategic  framework  (by  key 
objective)  

a.  Objective one: Further consolidate national strategies 

The 2014-2020 strategic framework aims to provide a “stronger and more systematic EU 
role in supporting the implementation of national strategies, through policy coordination, 
mutual  learning  and  the  use  of  EU  funding”.  It  lists  three  main  actions  under  this 
objective, as described in Table 2.  

Table 2: Summary of actions under objective one 

EU-level  action 
Strategic Framework 

identified 

in 

the 

Lead actor(s) 

Supporting actor(s) 

Review  national  OSH  strategies  in 
light  of 
the  new  EU  strategic 
framework  

Member 
States 

Relevant  stakeholders, 
social partners 

including 

35 Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work, “Towards better health and safety in the workplace - 
Opinion on Future Priorities of EU OSH Policy”, Doc.1048/19, Adopted on 04/06/2019 
36 The Senior Labour Inspectors Committee opinion “Future EU OSH enforcement priorities contributing 
to a renewed EU OSH Strategy”, adopted on 21 October 2020 
37 Council Conclusions of 13 June 2019 “The changing world of work: reflections on new forms of work 
and implications for the safety and health of workers” (Romanian presidency); Council Conclusions of 10 
December  2019  “A  New  EU  strategic  framework  on  health  and  safety  at  work:  Enhancing  the 
implementation of Occupational Safety and Health in the EU” (Finnish presidency); Council Conclusions 
of 8 June 2020 “Enhancing Well-being at Work” (Croatian presidency) 
38 This means the 27 current Member States of the EU, as well as, where relevant, the UK, which was a 
Member State until 31 January 2020, i.e. for most of the period covered by the framework 

13 

 
 
                                                           
Establish  a  database  covering  all 
national OSH strategy frameworks  

European 
Commission 

EU-OSHA 

Nominate contact points for national 
strategies  which  will  meet  regularly 
to map and exchange good practice  

European 
Commission 

EU-OSHA, ACSH and SLIC 

Objective one has been particularly successful and it is the area where the most progress 
has been made. This relates both to the extent to which Member States have updated their 
national strategies and to the extent to which the influence of the EU strategic framework 
can be seen in these strategies.  

Action one: Review national OSH strategies 

The 2014-2020 strategic framework invited Member States “to consider reviewing their 
national strategies in light of the new EU strategic framework, in close consultation with 
relevant stakeholders, including social partners”. Research at national level has identified 
an up-to-date national OSH strategy in almost all Member States, except for Luxembourg 
and Croatia.  

Objective  one  encourages  Member  States  not  only  to  “further  consolidate  national 
strategies”,  but  also  to  align  them  with  the  objectives  of  the  strategic  framework.  The 
national research identified examples of strong alignment with the challenges identified 
in  the  EU  strategic  framework  in  seven  Member  States  (namely  Belgium,  Bulgaria, 
Czechia,  Estonia,  Romania,  Sweden  and  Slovenia).  It  also  identified  direct  links  to  the 
objectives in Czechia, Spain, Ireland and Malta. National research in the other Member 
States did  not  provide indications of such strong  ties with  the EU strategic framework, 
but rather, impactful mutual influences, in particular in the UK and the Netherlands. 

In some cases, where national strategies do not refer to the EU strategic framework, this 
appears  to  be  a  matter  of  timing.  For  example,  although  Austria,  Denmark  and  the 
Netherlands  have  an  up-to-date  national  strategy,  these  were  adopted  prior  to  the 
publication  of  the  EU  strategic  framework  and  lasted  until  2020.  This  effectively 
prevented  them  from  adopting  new  strategies  in  the  years  directly  following  the 
publication of the EU strategic framework. 

Action two: Establish a database of national strategies 

At EU level, a review of all national strategies (including the UK) was carried out by EU-
OSHA, with support from the ACSH Strategy Working Party. The review was published 
in 2019 in a report, National strategies in the field of occupational safety and health in 
the  EU39,  which  provides  a  comprehensive  overview  of  national  strategies  by  objective 
and examines their links to the EU strategic framework.  

39  More  information  is  available  under  the  following  link:  https://osha.europa.eu/en/safety-and-health-
legislation/osh-strategies  

14 

 
 
                                                           
Additionally,  the  European  Commission  tasked  EU-OSHA  to  implement  a  data 
visualisation  tool  known  as  the  OSH  Barometer.  The  tool  was  released  in  2020  and 
provides  an  accessible,  straightforward  approach  to  measure  the  activities  and 
performance of different Member States against a range of OSH-related metrics. It allows 
interested  parties  to  have  an  overview  of  OSH  strategies,  statistics,  practices  and 
achievements across countries. More detailed information regarding the development of 
the tool and the data sources used can be found under objective six (improve statistical 
data collection). 

Action three: Nominate contact points for national strategies 

A contact point group of national experts was established in 2015 in order to facilitate the 
exchange  of  information  and  experience  in  this  area.  Building  on  this,  the  ACSH 
organised  two  workshops  on  national  OSH  strategies,  in  2016  and  2018,  in  order  to 
assess  progress  in  terms  of  updating  the  national  strategies,  share  learning  and  identify 
areas of good practice. 

b.  Objective two: Facilitate compliance with OSH legislation 

Objective  two  focuses  on  providing  the  support  needed  to  ensure  higher  levels  of 
compliance  with  OSH  legislation  across  the  EU,  particularly  amongst  small  and  micro 
enterprises. This  includes  tools to  facilitate actions such as risk assessments, as well as 
awareness raising, the production of high quality guidance and the promotion of peer-to-
peer learning. 

The  2014-2020  strategic  framework  includes  four  actions  under  objective  two,  as 
summarised  in  Table  3.  Responsibility  for  implementation  of  objective  two  is  divided 
between the European Commission and EU-OSHA, with support from ACSH and SLIC 
at EU level as well as the Member States. 

Table 3: Summary of actions under objective two 

EU-level  action  identified  in  the  strategic 
framework 

Lead actor(s) 

Supporting actor(s) 

Provide  financial  and  technical  support  on 
IT-based 
implementing  OiRA  and  other 
tools 

Develop  guidance  and  identify  examples  of 
good practice taking the specific nature and 
conditions  of  SMEs  and  particularly  micro-
enterprises into account 

Promote the exchange of good practice 

Member States 

EU-OSHA 

European 
Commission 

EU-OSHA 

European 
Commission 

Member States 

 (ACSH) 

Continue with awareness raising campaigns 

European 
Commission 

Member States 

EU-OSHA 

15 

 
 
 
 
A significant number of outputs were achieved at EU level under this objective and there 
is now a strong onus on Member States to adapt and promote these at national level. 

Action one: Provide financial and technical support on implementing OiRA and other 
IT-based tools 

EU and national financial support for OiRA tools has been identified in half of Member 
States. For example, in Czechia, it consists of support for research on these tools by the 
Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. A number of Member States, including Bulgaria, 
Latvia  and  Slovenia,  have  chosen  to  organise  free  seminars  with  the  assistance  of  EU-
OSHA40. Additionally, Latvia is promoting OiRA tools on social platforms and involving 
sectoral organisations in their dissemination. Slovenia prepared promotional adverts and 
promoted  OiRA  at  seminars  and  other  events.  In  other  countries,  as  exemplified  by 
Greece  and  Cyprus,  labour  inspectors  promote  the  use  of  OiRA  tools  during  their 
inspections. 

Regarding  support  for  other  online  risk  assessment  tools  developed  at  national  level, 
specific actions for promotion and development were reported in Austria, Germany and 
Ireland. In Germany, the promotion of these tools is made in particular via the accident 
insurance institutions and professional organisations, which are both directly involved in 
the design process and close to employers and workers.  

In Spain, measures were implemented to try to further increase the usage of the national 
tool  Prevencion10.es41,  including  the  development  of  device  agnostic  platforms  (i.e. 
mobile and tablet friendly) and allowing anonymous guest access. 

Action  two:  Develop  guidance  and  identify  examples  of  good  practice  taking  the 
specific  nature  and  conditions  of  SMEs  and  particularly  micro-enterprises  into 
account 

Guidance has been developed at EU level (by the European Commission, EU-OSHA, the 
ACSH and SLIC) in support of this action.  

This  guidance  combines  consideration  of  both  long-term  trends  (such  as  psychosocial 
risk, wellbeing at work and musculoskeletal disorders) and responses to emerging risks. 
A  notable  example  is  the  publication  of  guidance  to  support  a  safe  return  to  the 
workplace  during  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  developed  in  2020.  Additionally,  the 
European  Commission  in  cooperation  with  the  ACSH  has  published  a  number  of  good 
practice  guides,  some  general  (e.g.  work-related  vehicle  risks)  and  some  targeted  at 
sectors  with  a  significant  proportion  of  micro  and  small  enterprises  (MSEs)  (e.g.  risk 

40  The  assistance  of  the  EU-OSHA  is  taking  place  via  National  Focal  Points  and  specific  promotional 
schemes  are  offered  to  two  or  three  Member  States  per  year  (Focal  point  Assistance  Tool,  FAST). 
Information obtained via EU-OSHA. 
41 Spain, website “Prevencion10.es”, available at: https://www.prevencion10.es/. 

16 

 
 
                                                           
prevention in small fishing vessels, OSH best practice in agriculture, livestock farming, 
horticulture  and  forestry).  SLIC  has  also  published  guides  to  help  labour  inspectors 
assess  the  quality  of  risk  assessment  and  risk  management  measures  with  regard  to 
psychosocial  risks  and  musculoskeletal  disorders.  The  European  Commission  has  also 
published  non-binding  guidelines  on  the  implementation  of  specific  directives,  such  as 
Directive 2013/35/EU on Electromagnetic Fields42.  

The  most  common  actions  implemented  at  Member  State  level  include  guidelines 
targeting  certain  OSH  risks  or  working  activities,  training  programmes,  consultations 
(e.g. workshops, conferences), expert support and financial support. 

In  parallel  and/or  within  the  context  of  general  measures  to  facilitate  compliance  with 
OSH  legislation,  Member  States  have  adopted  a  wide  array  of  measures  specifically 
targeting  MSEs.  Some  examples  are  the  specific  financial  support  to  MSEs  linked  to 
OSH  compliance  in  Bulgaria  and  Denmark;  the  involvement  of  MSEs  in  OSH 
policymaking  in  France;  the  creation  in  Austria  of  a  working  group  promoting  risk 
awareness and assessment in MSEs; the creation in Poland of a Network of Health and 
Safety  Experts  to  support  MSEs,  and  legal  adaptations  for  MSEs  in  Denmark  and 
Hungary (less expensive fines), and Sweden (no requirement for MSEs to collate policy 
documents, routines and annual audits to avoid administrative burden while maintaining 
the same level of protection). 

Action three: Promote the exchange of good practice 

While some examples of information sharing were identified under this action, a number 
of stakeholders consulted perceived this area as one where more could have been done. 

The  main  activity  organised  by  the  European  Commission  has  been  peer  reviews 
between national authorities, three of which were organised during the reference period. 
In October 2017, the Irish government hosted a peer review meeting on the use of web-
based tools for OSH risk assessment. This was followed in June 2018 by a peer review 
meeting  in  Denmark  on  the  efficient  transposition,  implementation  and  enforcement  of 
EU OSH legislation. A third peer review was organised in Sweden in October 2019 on 
"Legislation and practical management of psychosocial risks at work”. The peer reviews 
were  well  received  by  participants,  and  perceived  as  “successful”  and  “really  very 
interesting”. 

Additionally, EU-OSHA has organised a number of conferences and meetings through its 
OiRA  and  interactive  risk  assessment  tools  (IRAT)  communities,  to  encourage  mutual 
learning  and  best  practice  exchange.  Initiatives  such  as  the  Good  Practice  Awards, 

42 Directive 2013/35/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the minimum 
health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents 
(electromagnetic  fields)  (20th  individual  Directive  within  the  meaning  of  Article  16(1)  of  Directive 
89/391/EEC) and repealing Directive 2004/40/EC, OJ L 179, 29.6.2013, p. 1 

17 

 
                                                           
carried  out  within  the  framework  of  the  healthy  workplaces  campaigns43,  are  also 
designed to identify and celebrate best practice within enterprises at national level. 

Action four: Continue with awareness raising campaigns 

EU-OSHA  implemented  four  healthy  workplaces  campaigns42  in  the  period  under 
review,  covering  the  following  topics:  management  of  stress  (2014-2015),  healthy 
workplaces for all ages (2016-2017), management of dangerous substances (2018-2019) 
and  prevention  of  musculoskeletal  disorders  (ongoing).  Evaluations  of  the  campaigns 
have  noted  a  steady  increase  in  the  number  of  unique  visitors  to  the  campaign  website 
and  online  events  from  one  campaign  to  the  next.  There  has  been  a  clear  alignment 
between the campaign topics and EU-level priorities and activities in the field of OSH. 
For  example,  the  campaign  on  dangerous  substances  was  reported  to  support  the 
implementation of the continuously updated EU chemicals legislation and as being very 
well aligned with the Roadmap on Carcinogens44.  

A  number  of  different  awareness  raising  campaigns  have  also  been  implemented  at 
national level (in addition to national campaigns organised within the remit of the healthy 
workplaces  campaigns42).  These  included  awareness  raising/inspection  campaigns  on 
OSH  matters,  such  as  in  Spain  (technical  assistance  campaigns),  Belgium  (inspection 
campaigns  on  temporary  and  mobile  construction  sites  to  promote  measures  to  prevent 
risks) and Hungary (campaigns on the employment of temporary workers); campaigns in 
schools (for example, training programmes for technical school graduates in Greece and 
initiatives  in  Cyprus  to  promote  OSH  in  schools);  mass  /  social  media  campaigns, 
exemplified  by  the  approach  of  Portugal  (which  successfully  promoted  the  “Practical 
guide  to  safety  and  health  in  the  placement  and  reception  of  temporary  workers”  on 
Facebook)  and  Malta  (which  launched  mass  media  campaigns  targeting  temporary  or 
mobile construction sites and young workers).  

c.  Objective  three:  Better  enforcement  of  OSH  legislation  by  Member 

States 

Objective  three  focuses  on  the  role  of  labour  inspectors  in  facilitating  compliance  with 
legislation, deterring undeclared work and identifying key emerging risks and priorities. 
National and EU-level actions under this objective focused on understanding the current 
capacity of labour inspectors to carry out these duties, evaluating and improving current 
capacity building activities and analysing the effectiveness of fines and sanctions, as well 
as other “soft” enforcement measures.  

In  its  2019  opinion  on  future  priorities  of  EU  OSH  policy9,  the  ACSH  underlined  the 
essential nature of adequate monitoring and enforcement at Member State level in order 
to  ensure  that  the  OSH  acquis  is  applied  uniformly  across  the  European  Union, 

43  More  information  is  available  under  the  following  link:  https://osha.europa.eu/en/healthy-workplaces-
campaigns  
44 More information is available under the following link: https://roadmaponcarcinogens.eu/  

18 

 
                                                           
guaranteeing a level playing field for companies and the same basic level of protection 
for workers. 

The  main  actions  identified  to  improve  enforcement  of  OSH  legislation  were  primarily 
addressed to the European Commission and SLIC. SLIC plays a key role at EU level in 
promoting  effective  and  equivalent  enforcement  of  the  EU  OSH  directives,  and  in  the 
exchange  of  national  enforcement  policies,  experiences  and  practices.  It  also  has  an 
important  role  in  developing  common  principles  of  labour  inspection  in  the  field  of 
health and safety at work, and in developing methods of assessing the national systems of 
inspection  in  relation  to  those  principles.  It  promotes  improved  knowledge  and  mutual 
understanding  of  the  different  national  systems  and  practices  of  labour  inspection,  the 
methods  and  legal  frameworks  for  action  (through  awareness-raising  campaigns, 
exchanges and training programmes aimed at labour inspectors). At Member State level, 
labour inspectorates are the main actors in charge of the enforcement of OSH legislation. 
They  monitor  and  inspect  how  OSH  requirements  are  applied  in  workplaces  and  issue 
warnings or levy sanctions in case of infringements to these requirements. 

A summary of the actions foreseen under objective three is provided in Table 4 below. 

Table 4: Summary of actions under objective three 

EU-level action identified in the strategic framework 

Lead actor 

Supporting 
actor 

Map the resources of labour inspectorates and evaluate their 
capacity  to  carry  out  their  main  duties  on  enforcing  OSH 
legislation 

SLIC 

N/A 

Evaluate  the  programme  of  exchange/training  of  labour 
inspectors and examine ways to enhance the current tools for 
cooperation  within  the  SLIC,  taking  into  account  new  OSH 
challenges 

European 
Commission 

SLIC 

Assess the effectiveness of sanctions and administrative fines 
imposed  by  Member  States,  as  well  as  other  measures  of 
‘soft  enforcement’  and  non-traditional  ways  of  monitoring 
compliance 

European 
Commission 

SLIC, 
ACSH 

There  was  steady  progress  in  implementation  of  objective  three,  despite  significant 
concerns  regarding  enforcement  capacity  from  many  labour  inspectorates  as  a  result  of 
national funding cuts. At EU level, SLIC implemented a number of actions in support of 
a more coordinated approach to enforcement in EU Member States.  

Action one: Map resources of Labour Inspectorates 

19 

 
 
The  SLIC  document  library45  includes  information  on  the  OSH  national  enforcement 
bodies  and  their  responsibility  for  different  areas.  Annual  reports  and  handbooks 
provided by national labour inspectorates on a voluntary basis provide an overview of the 
resources  and  capacity  of  labour  inspectorates  in  carrying  out  their  main  duties  with 
regard  to  OSH  enforcement.  The  documents  include  information  on  the  main  actors 
within each country in terms of enforcement, sectors covered (and excluded), information 
on  the  authority  (including,  for  example,  number  of  staff,  number  of  inspectors, 
increases/decreases in staff, inspection activities and enforcement activities).  

Additionally, SLIC has carried out research into specific issues, which are also relevant 
in  terms  of  responsibilities  and  workload  of  national  labour  inspectorates.  Two 
particularly relevant examples are:  

•  Study about the impact of the economic crisis on the European labour inspection 
systems  from 2008 to 2014, published in  2016  by the SLIC Working Group on 
the Impact of the Crisis. 

•  Study  on  improving  intervention  of  labour  inspection  in  MSEs  regarding 
legislation  transposing  EU  OSH  directives,  commissioned  by  DG  EMPL  and 
published in 2017. 

These  studies  both  support  the  development  of  a  more  nuanced  understanding  of  the 
challenges faced by labour inspectorates across Europe.  

Action  two:  Evaluate  SLIC  exchange/training  programme  and  examine  ways  to 
enhance current tools for cooperation within the SLIC, taking into account new OSH 
challenges 

There  is  an  ongoing  programme  of  bilateral  exchanges  organised  within  the  remit  of 
SLIC,  with  individual  labour  inspectors  visiting  their  counterparts  in  other  countries  to 
understand specific aspects of OSH enforcement and labour inspection.  

SLIC  has  also  committed  to  a  rolling  programme  of  labour  inspectorates  evaluations, 
including  adopting  in  SLIC  Plenary  a  rota  for  future  years.  Evaluations  are  carried  out 
with  reference  to  an  evaluation  reference  manual,  which  describes  common  evaluation 
principles,  a  reference  evaluation  plan  and  timescales,  an  evaluation  protocol  and 
questionnaire,  and  implementation  tools  such  as  letter  templates  and  checklists. 
Additional  tips  are  included  throughout  the  manual,  to  reflect  the  learning  gained  from 
previous  evaluation  rounds.  The  reference  manual  is  regularly  updated,  with  the  most 
recent version dating to 2019.  

A  detailed  report  and  executive  summary  of  each  evaluation  are  shared  with  all  SLIC 
members  using  the  SLIC  CIRCA  intranet  site.  The  executive  summaries  are  reviewed 

45  SLIC  document  library  (public  access),  available  at:  https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/fea534f4-2590-
4490-bca6-504782b47c79/library/31647d8a-ccec-44af-ba1f-f4f37bb356b6  

20 

 
                                                           
every  two  years,  in  order  to  identify  common  themes,  which  should  be  linked  to  the 
SLIC thematic days. 

The  first  round  of  evaluations  focused  on  benchmarking  labour  inspectorate’s 
performance  against  the  common  principles  described  in  the  Reference  Manual.  Future 
evaluations  are  expected  to  build  on  this  foundational  work,  exploring  the  extent  to 
which the strategic framework is reflected in the work of labour inspectorates as well as 
how recommendations from previous evaluations have been implemented. 

In  May  2019,  SLIC  published  a  document  entitled  “Common  standards  for  OSH 
inspector 
training 
training  programme”.  This  document  describes  a  seven-part 
programme  which  is  designed  to  align  with  common  principles  of  OSH  inspection,  as 
described  in  ILO  Convention  8146  (concerning  labour  inspection  in  industry  and 
commerce). EU social partners and members of the ACSH expressed strong support for 
the role of SLIC in supporting the training of labour inspectors and providing a common 
framework. 

Action  three:  Assess  effectiveness  of  sanctions  and  administrative  fines,  ‘soft 
enforcement’ measures and non-traditional ways of monitoring compliance 

Overall  progress  in  implementation  of  this  objective  at  EU  level  appears  to  have  been 
steady,  but  at  national  level  efforts  to  improve  enforcement  were  often  limited  by 
resource constraints.  

The  importance  of  SLIC  in  promoting  better  coordination  of  enforcement  at  Member 
State  level  has  been  highlighted  by  the  ACSH  and  this  opinion  is  reflected  across  all 
stakeholder  groups.  At  national  level,  labour  inspectorates  (many  of  whom  have  faced 
significant funding cuts in the last decade) expressed significant concerns related to their 
limited enforcement capacity. To cope with these limited capacities and decrease in the 
numbers of inspections labour inspectorates develop, inter alia, risk-based approaches to 
prioritise  inspections.  The  COVID-19  pandemic  in  2020  was  also  identified  as  a 
significant obstacle to perform enforcement, making it very difficult for labour inspectors 
to carry out in-person inspections.  

Effectiveness of sanctions  

National  research  unearthed  a  limited  amount  of  information  on  the  effectiveness  of 
sanctions.  Indeed,  only  two  Member  States  (Estonia  and  Latvia)  were  found  to  have 
carried out official evaluations on the effectiveness of sanctions.  

In  Latvia,  the  results  of  the  stocktaking  showed  that  pre-existing  sanctions  were 
insufficient. This led to a new maximum sanction of EUR 32,000, a twelvefold increase 
on the previous regime. In Sweden, the level of administrative fines for violations of the 
Working Environment Act has been increased to a maximum of SEK 1 million (approx. 

46 
https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C081 

information 

following 

available 

under 

More 

the 

is 

link: 

21 

 
                                                           
EUR 100,000). The adaptation of the rules on sanctions to the (legislative) changes in the 
social legislation was also an objective of the Spanish national strategy. 

In  several  Member  States  stakeholders  were  supportive  of  the  use  of  sanctions  as  the 
principal  means  of  enforcement  for  OSH  rules.  Nevertheless,  a  number  of  barriers  to 
effectiveness were identified. In Poland, worker representatives were critical of the very 
low  incidence  of  fines  for  violations  of  OSH  legislation  and  underlined  the  need  for 
effective  sanctions  as  a  deterrent  to  infringements.  In  Portugal,  the  delays  and  lengthy 
judicial procedures were felt to limit the dissuasive effect of sanctions.  

To improve the effectiveness  of sanctions, Hungary allows labour inspectors to  impose 
on-the-spot  fines  during  inspections.  Ireland  publicises  information  on  sanctions  levied 
and the names of companies that infringed OSH legislation in the national media.  

However, research in the Netherlands has found that a 2012 shift towards more stringent 
enforcement has not led to conclusive results, and a reinforcement of the culture of self-
enforcement within companies is now being promoted.   

 ‘Soft enforcement’ and non-traditional ways of monitoring compliance 

The  soft  enforcement  of  OSH  legislation  implies  a  dialogue  between  the  inspection 
authorities  and  the  companies  supervised.  A  common  approach,  which  is  promoted  by 
the EU strategic framework and has been identified in 14 Member States, is to put more 
weight  on  the  advisory  roles  of  labour  inspectors.  For  example,  Austria  and  Portugal 
have included follow-up visits, in Belgium and Cyprus, labour inspectors can offer “on 
the  spot”  training  to  MSEs,  in  Malta,  workers’  health  and  safety  representatives  are 
invited to  participate in  inspections, Czechia has  set  up a safe enterprise  programme in 
which  educational  and  preventive  activities  are  organised  and  in  Latvia,  the  “Consult 
First” initiative promotes cooperation between companies and labour inspectors.   

Finally, in some Member States the enforcement of OSH policies has been promoted and 
ensured by other stakeholders, without requiring the involvement of labour inspectors. In 
Sweden,  soft  enforcement  is  inherent  to  the  system  of  prevention,  as  Regional  Safety 
Representatives  nominated  by  trade  unions  may  visit  companies  where  at  least  one 
employee  is  member  of  the  trade  union,  with  a  focus  on  prevention  and  dialogue.  In 
France, consulting engineers and control agents of the social security, who are not labour 
inspectors,  may  issue  injunctions  in  face  of  an  exceptional  risk  for  employers  to  take 
“any justified measure of prevention” within a specified timeframe.  

d.  Objective four: Simplify existing legislation 

Objective  four  reflects  the  need  to  eliminate  unnecessary  administrative  burden  and 
simplify  EU  legislation,  in  accordance  with  the  objectives  of  the  overarching 
Commission’s  EU  regulatory  fitness  and  performance  programme  (REFIT)47.  With 

47  COM(2013)  685  final  of  2.10.2013:  Regulatory  Fitness  and  Performance  (REFIT):  Results  and  Next 
Steps. 

22 

 
                                                           
regard to OSH legislation, this means assessing the extent to which existing legislation is 
fit  for  purpose,  examining  how  it  can  be  better  implemented  and  working  to  support 
parity  between  Member  States  in  terms  of  implementation.  Any  simplification  efforts 
should seek to  balance strong worker protections with a reduction  in the administrative 
burden for MSEs. 

Three main actions were identified with regard to simplification, with responsibility for 
implementation divided between Member States and the European Commission. Table 5 
below  provides  a  review  of  progress  against  each  of  the  main  actions  identified  to 
support the simplification of legislation within the European strategic framework. 

Table 5: Summary of actions under objective four 

EU-level  action  identified  in  the  strategic 
framework 

Lead actor 

Supporting 
actor 

Identify  possible  simplifications  and/or 
reductions  of  unnecessary  burden  as  part 
of  the  evaluation  of  the  OSH  legislation, 
and  promote  a  public  debate  with  all 
stakeholders  

identify 
to 
Encourage  Member  States 
sources  of  specific 
regulatory  burden 
created by their own transposing legislation 
legislation,  and 
on  OSH  and  national 
analyse  national  implementation  reports  to 
identify  good  practice  and 
to  promote 
exchange of information  

Assess the situation of micro-enterprises in 
to 
low-risk  sectors  and  consider  how 
simplify 
risk 
implementation  of 
assessment, including documentation 

the 

European 
Commission 

ACSH 

Member 
States 

European 
Commission 

European 
Commission 

N/A 

In  relation  to  the  implementation  of  objective  four,  the  European  Commission  updated 
six directives following the ex-post evaluation of the EU OSH Framework Directive and 
23  related  directives.  This  represents  a  significant  effort  to  modernise  the  EU  OSH 
acquis.  At  national  level,  however,  only  ten  Member  States  were  found  to  be 
implementing activity in support of this action.  

Action one: Identify possible simplifications and/or reductions of unnecessary burden 
and promote a public debate with all stakeholders 

Clear  progress  has  been  made  since  2014  with  regard  to  updating  EU  legislation  and 
removing unnecessary duplication, where necessary, although this task is ongoing. Most 
of  the  activities  in  this  area  took  place  after  2017,  when  the  European  Commission 
published  the  staff  working  document48  on  its  evaluation  of  EU  OSH  Framework 

48  Staff  Working  Document  “Ex-post  evaluation  of  the  European  Union  occupational  safety  and  health 
Directives  (REFIT  evaluation)”  SWD(2017)  9  accompanying  Communication  from  Commission  to  the 

23 

 
 
                                                           
 
Directive 89/391/EEC and 23 related directives. This led to the publication, in 2017, of 
the  Communication  “Safer  and  healthier  work  for  all  -  Modernisation  of  the  EU 
occupational  safety  and  health  legislation  and  policy”8  ,  which  identified  a  number  of 
pieces  of  legislation  to  be  updated  in  order  to  ensure  the  EU  OSH  acquis  remains 
relevant and fit for purpose. 

The 2017 Communication identified six directives in need of modernisation. These are: 

•  Directive 92/58/EEC on OSH Signs at Work49). A specific guidance document to 
better  explain  the  relation  between  this  directive  and  the  EN  ISO  700  Signs 
Standard has been developed in order to avoid any misunderstanding. The ACSH 
adopted in December 2020 an opinion on a non-binding guidance in this respect.  

•  Directive  2000/54/EC  on  Biological  Agents50.  The  list  of  biological  agents  in 
Annex III was reviewed and updated in 2019 together with an update of Annexes 
V and VI (Directive (EU) 2019/183351).  

o  The  directive  was  updated  again  in  2020  in  view  of  the  COVID-19 
pandemic  to  include  SARS-CoV-2  (coronavirus)  in  Annex  III  (Directive 
(EU) 2020/73952). 

•  Directive 92/29/EEC on Medical Treatment on Board Vessels6. The compulsory 
list of medical supplies laid down in the directive was reviewed and the relevant 
annexes to the directive were updated in 2019 (Directive (EU) 2019/183453).  

•  Directive  89/656/EEC  on  Personal  Protective  Equipment54.  The  annexes  to  the 
directive  were  updated  in  2019  to  take  account  of  the  latest  scientific  and 
technological evolutions (Directive (EU) 2019/183255). 

European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  Regions 
“Safer and Healthier Work for All  -Modernisation of the EU Occupational Safety and Health Legislation 
and Policy” COM(2017)12 final. 
49 Council Directive 92/58/EEC of 24 June 1992 on the minimum requirements for the provision of safety 
and/or  health  signs  at  work  (ninth  individual  Directive  within  the  meaning  of  Article  16(1)  of  Directive 
89/391/EEC), OJ L 245, 26.8.1992, p.23 
50  Directive  2000/54/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  18  September  2000  on  the 
protection  of  workers  from  risks  related  to  exposure  to  biological  agents  at  work  (seventh  individual 
directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC), OJ L 262, 17.10.2000, p.21 
51  Commission  Directive  (EU)  2019/1833  of  24  October  2019  amending  Annexes  I,  III,  V  and  VI  to 
Directive  2000/54/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  as  regards  purely  technical 
adjustments, OJ L 279, 31.10.2019, p. 54 
52 Commission Directive (EU) 2020/739 of 3 June 2020 amending Annex III to Directive 2000/54/EC of 
the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  as  regards  the  inclusion  of  SARS-CoV-2  in  the  list  of 
biological  agents  known  to  infect  humans  and  amending  Commission  Directive  (EU)  2019/1833,  OJ  L 
175, 4.6.2020, p. 11 
53  Commission  Directive  (EU)  2019/1834  of  24  October  2019  amending  Annexes  II  and  IV  to  Council 
Directive 92/29/EEC as regards purely technical adaptations, OJ L 279, 31.10.2019, p. 80 

24 

 
                                                                                                                                                                            
•  Directive  89/654/EEC  on  Workplaces56.  This  directive  is  currently  being 
reviewed, with a particular focus on whether the definition of “workplace” should 
be  updated  to  reflect  new  working  realities  (e.g.  platform  working,  teleworking 
etc.). The annexes are also being reviewed.  

•  Directive  90/270/EEC  on  Display  Screen  Equipment57.  This  directive  is  also 
being revisited to remove references to obsolete technologies and update certain 
definitions (such as “workstation”) to reflect the modern workplace. Additionally, 
exemptions  included  in  the  directive  are  being  reviewed  to  check  whether  they 
are still relevant and/or required. 

Furthermore,  a  number  of  occupational  exposure  limit  values  (OELs)  as  well  as  other 
provisions  under  Directive  2004/37/EC  on  Carcinogens  and  Mutagens  at  Work19  have 
been  revised  or  introduced  addressing  26  carcinogens  or  mutagens.  In  addition,  two 
directives  were  adopted  establishing  a  fourth58  and  a  fifth  list59  of  indicative  OELs  for 
hazardous  chemicals  /  groups  of  chemicals  under  the  scope  of  Directive  98/24/EC  on 
Chemical  Agents  at  Work60.  Preparatory  work  is  also  underway  to  review  the  current 
limit  values  of  lead  and  establish  a  new  OEL  for  diisocyanates  under  the  scope  of  the 
Directive  on  Chemical  Agents  and  to  review  the  existing  OEL  within  Directive 
2009/148/EC  on  Asbestos  at  Work4.  In  addition,  further  action  on  cobalt  has  been 
envisaged. 

In  general,  these  changes  were  praised  by  stakeholders,  particularly  for  their  focus  on 
modernising and updating the legislation. However, some issues have arisen, perhaps the 
most  notable  of  which  is  that  there  were  sometimes  different  approaches  to  scientific 
assessment underpinning different EU chemicals legislations. 

54 Council Directive 89/656/EEC of 30 November 1989 on the minimum health and safety requirements for 
the use by workers of personal protective equipment at the workplace (third   individual directive within 
the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC), OJ L 393, 30.12.1989, p.18 
55  Commission  Directive  2019/1832  of  24  October  2019  amending  Annexes  I,  II  and  III  to  Council 
Directive 89/656/EEC as regards purely technical adjustments, OJ L 279, 31.10.2019, p. 35 
56  Council  Directive  89/654/EEC  of  30  November  1989  concerning  the  minimum  safety  and  health 
requirements for the workplace (first individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 
89/391/EEC), OJ L 393, 30.12.1989, p.1 
57 Council Directive 90/270/EEC of 29 May 1990 on the minimum safety and health requirements for work 
with display screen equipment (fifth individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 
89/391/EEC), OJ L 156, 21.6.1990, p.14 
58  Commission  Directive  (EU)  2017/164  of  31  January  2017  establishing  a  fourth  list  of  indicative 
occupational  exposure  limit  values  pursuant  to  Council  Directive  98/24/EC,  and  amending  Commission 
Directives 91/322/EEC, 2000/39/EC and 2009/161/EU, OJ L 27, 1.2.2017, p. 115 
59  Commission  Directive  (EU)  2019/1831  of  24  October  2019  establishing  a  fifth  list  of  indicative 
occupational  exposure  limit  values  pursuant  to  Council  Directive  98/24/EC  and  amending  Commission 
Directive 2000/39/EC, OJ L 279, 31.10.2019, p. 31 
60 Council Directive 98/24/EC  of 7 April 1998 on the protection of the health and safety of workers from 
the risks related to chemical agents at work (fourteenth individual directive within the meaning of Article 
16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC, OJ L131, 5.5. 1998, p.11  

25 

 
                                                                                                                                                                            
This issue was also reflected in the 2017 Communication8 and the 2019 Fitness Check of 
the  most  relevant  EU  chemicals  legislation  (excluding  REACH)61.  Both  of  these 
documents identified inconsistencies in scientific advice and risk assessments issued by 
different  EU  scientific  bodies  depending  on  the  competencies  and  remit  determined  by 
the relevant legislation. Since 2017, relevant Commission services have worked closely 
together  to  resolve  these  issues  and  ensure  complementarity  between  the  two  sets  of 
legislation.  For  example,  inconsistency  concerning  scientific  assessment  has  been 
resolved  by  the  Committee  for  Risk  Assessment  (RAC)  of  the  European  Chemicals 
Agency  (ECHA)  being  the  only  scientific  body  providing  such  assessment  concerning 
workers protection from the exposure to chemicals. 

Action two: Encourage Member States to identify sources of specific regulatory burden 
created  by  their  own  transposing  legislation  on  OSH  and  national  legislation  and 
analyse  national  implementation  reports  to  identify  good  practice  and  to  promote 
exchange of information 

While  responsibility  for  this  action  lies  with  the  Member  States,  the  European 
Commission  has  a  role  to  play  in  supporting  the  identification  of  specific  sources  of 
regulatory burden, identifying good practice and promoting information sharing.  

The  ACSH  has  plans  to  create  a  working  party  to  look  at  the  costs,  benefits  and 
administrative  burden  of  OSH  legislation  but  this  has  not  yet  been  implemented. 
Additionally,  the  following  chapter  presents  a  review  of  the  national  implementation 
reports. 

Processes for the identification of regulatory and administrative burdens 

The extent to which Member States have put specific actions in place that allow for the 
identification  of  regulatory  and  administrative  burdens  varies  significantly.  One 
important  success  factor  identified  by  countries  seeking  to  simplify  OSH  legislation  is 
the involvement of social partners in the process. 

Germany, Italy and Slovenia had already conducted substantial simplification actions in 
2007-2012.  Countries  including  Malta,  Ireland,  Croatia,  Latvia  and  Czechia  have 
endeavoured  to  take  a  systematic  approach  to  simplification.  In  some  Member  States, 
such as Latvia, Slovenia and Czechia, the regulatory burden must be assessed every time 
that  a  new  piece  of  OSH  legislation  or  an  amendment  to  existing  OSH  legislation  is 
proposed.   

The  national  research  also  uncovered  some  less  successful  attempts  at  reducing 
regulatory and administrative burdens.  

Actions towards the simplification of OSH legislation  

61 European Commission, 2019, Findings of the Fitness Check of the most relevant chemicals legislation 
(excluding  REACH)  and 
identified  challenges,  gaps  and  weaknesses,  available  at:  https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0102 

26 

 
                                                           
In  their  attempts  to  simplify  OSH  legislation,  Member  States  must  ensure  a  sufficient 
level  of  protection  to  workers,  which  cannot  be  lowered  compared  to  standards  of  EU 
legislation.  This  has  been  identified  as  a  significant  barrier  to  simplification  (e.g.  in 
France) and could be an indicator that simplification would usually be more appropriate 
at EU level. 

One  of  the  most  significant  simplification  processes  identified  at  national  level  is  the 
codification of OSH legislation. Examples of this approach include the Belgian Code of 
Wellbeing at Work, or the adoption of a new OSH Framework Act in Croatia pursuant to 
its  accession  (as  a  Member  State)  to  the  European  Union,  and  work  carried  out  in 
Germany to simplify the ordinance on workplaces.  

Several Member States, including Denmark, Malta and Poland, identified the integration 
of the obligatory assessment of the explosion protection document pursuant to Directive 
1999/92/EC  on  Explosive  Atmospheres62  into  the  general  workplace  risk  assessment 
document  as  a  measure  to  simplify  the  administrative  procedures  required  from 
companies.  Additionally,  in  2017  Croatia  and  Bulgaria  both  adopted  rules  for  the 
simplification of reporting accidents at work and occupational diseases. In Slovenia, the 
digitisation projects facilitated reporting of accidents at work and occupational diseases. 

Another  approach  to  simplification  has  involved  the  removal  of  certain  (declaratory) 
obligations,  which  were  deemed  not  effective  enough.  For  example,  Austria  has  lifted 
several  administrative  obligations  in  2017,  including  the  obligation  to  keep  records  of 
near misses, and in Poland, workers who are re-employed by the same employer in the 
same  position  and  with  the  same  working  conditions  have  been  removed  from  the 
mandatory preliminary medical examination scheme.  

Finally,  rather  than  focusing  on  legislative  simplifications,  some  Member  States  have 
chosen  to  focus  on  improving  companies’  understanding  of  OSH  legislation  and 
supporting implementation, via the development of OiRA and other online tools. This is 
the case, for example, in Greece and Portugal. 

Digitisation of processes to reduce administrative burdens 

A small number of initiatives to move administrative procedures online were identified, 
in order to make compliance easier. For example, in France an online platform has been 
developed  to  allow  enterprises  to  declare  demolition,  removal  and  encapsulation  plans 
for asbestos and Latvia and Lithuania allow the online declaration of accidents at work 
and  the  digital  reporting  of  risk  assessments.  In  Slovenia,  several  digitisation  projects 
have been initiated to facilitate reporting of accidents at work and occupational diseases 
digitally. The COVID-19 pandemic was identified as one factor behind the transition to 

62 Directive 1999/92/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1999 on minimum 
requirements for improving the safety and health protection of workers potentially at risk from explosive 
atmospheres (fifteenth individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC), 
OJ L 23, 28.1.2000, p.57 

27 

 
                                                           
digital reporting in Slovenia, with the introduction of digital reports to notify authorities 
of the number of employees who are teleworking.  

Simplification of rules for SMEs 

Only  a  few  instances  of  simplification  of  legislation  or  administrative  processes 
specifically  for  SMEs  were  identified  via  the  national  research.  Croatia  has  simplified 
rules  on  mandatory  OSH  councils  in  SMEs.  While  maintaining  the  core  obligations  on 
SMEs  (risk  analyses,  action  plans  and  instructions  for  hazardous  work),  Sweden  has 
removed documents requirements from the systematic work environment management of 
micro  enterprises.  In  France,  certain  rules  on  the  SME  workplaces  were  amended 
(requirement  to  provide  locker  rooms  changed  to  secured  storage  unit).  Austria  has 
extended  the  interval  between  inspections  of  office  (or  similar)  workplaces  between  1 
and 10 employees, from two to three years. 

Action three: Assess the situation of micro-enterprises in low-risk sectors and consider 
how to simplify the implementation of risk assessment 

There is limited evidence of a coordinated effort at EU level to identify opportunities for 
simplifying  the  requirements  placed  on  micro-enterprises.  Research  carried  out  by  EU-
OSHA  as  part  of  its  European  survey  of  enterprises  on  new  and  emerging  risks 
(ESENER) activity63, indicates that while one obstacle faced by small enterprises is that 
implementing  OSH  legislation  represents  an  administrative  burden,  small  business 
owners are often rather faced with the obstacle of not being aware of their obligations or 
not fully understanding OSH principles.  

Additionally,  DG  EMPL  commissioned  a  study  on  the  obligation  to  document  the  risk 
assessment  for  very  small  enterprises64.  The  study  found  that  an  exemption  from  the 
documentation obligation for micro-enterprises in low risk sectors might lead to a small 
net  benefit  under  some  scenarios,  but  that  a  negative  net  benefit  (and  possibly  a 
substantial one) could not be ruled out. 

Some social partners and stakeholders consulted have questioned whether simplification 
is  the  most  important  action  to  support  MSEs,  and  pointed  instead  to  the  need  for 
increased awareness raising, other programmes (financial, technical support, training), a 
sector-based approach and better-targeted support for OSH compliance.  

e.  Objective five: Address ageing workforce, emerging new risks, work-

related and occupational diseases 

Objective five recognises the changing landscape of OSH and the need to address  new 
challenges  such  as  the  ageing  workforce.  Additionally,  it  is  intended  to  address  the 

63 EU-OSHA, ESENER, available at: https://visualisation.osha.europa.eu/esener#!/en  
64  European  Commission,  December  2012,  Study  on  the  consequences  of  the  documentation  of  the  risk 
assessment  (Article  9  of  Directive  89/391/EEC)  by  very  small  enterprises  engaged  in  low-risk  activities, 
compared with a possible exemption from that obligation (VC/2011/451) 

28 

 
                                                           
emergence of new technologies, products, industries and ways of working that impact the 
risk landscape workers are facing. 

The  strategic  framework  included  several  actions  under  objective  five.  Table  6  below 
lists those actions, as well as the actors the Framework identified as responsible for their 
implementation. 

Table 6: Summary of actions under objective five 

EU-level action identified in the strategic framework 

Lead actor 

Supporting 
actor 

Establish a network of OSH professionals and scientists 

European 
Commission 

N/A 

Support  the  dissemination  of  the  findings  of  the  European 
Risk Observatory 

European 
Commission 

EU-OSHA 

Identify and exchange good practice on ways to improve OSH 
conditions  for  specific  categories  of  workers,    e.g.  older 
workers, 
inexperienced 
younger workers (including those employed in different forms 
of 
temporary  contracts),  apprenticeships,  workers  with 
disabilities and women 

EU-OSHA 

N/A 

Promote rehabilitation and reintegration measures 

European 
Commission 

EU-OSHA 

Identify  and  disseminate  good  practice  on  mental  health 
problems at work 

EU-OSHA 

N/A 

Progress  against  this  strategic  objective  has  been  relatively  steady,  with  a  particular 
emphasis in recent years on the effort to tackle occupational diseases caused by exposure 
to  hazardous  chemicals.  Work  on  chemicals  legislation  (described  under  objective  4) 
resulting from the ex-post evaluation of the EU OSH acquis was a key driver of progress 
in  this  area,  as  they  provided  momentum  for  initiatives  aimed  at  raising  awareness  as 
well as sharing best practices on managing hazardous chemicals and the associated risks. 
Progress  was  also  noted  on  addressing  other  types  of  occupational  diseases,  namely 
musculoskeletal disorders.  

While a lot of progress has been made under this objective, the specific focus on new and 
emerging  risks  means  that  there  will  always  be  more  left  to  do.  The  stakeholders 
consulted highlighted that the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated some existing risks 
and  emerging  trends,  particularly  with  regard  to  ways  of  working,  which  have 
experienced a rapid shift. Changes to the way of working also encompass the broadening 
of different categories of workers – the classical employer-employee model is no longer 
the only one, as the number of self-employed workers, informal workers and workers in 
the gig-economy is increasing. This requires policy makers to look at the existing corpus 
of legislation and practices with a new lens. 

29 

 
 
 
Action one: Establish a network of OSH professionals and scientists 

Evidence  has  not  been  found  on  specific  measures  or  initiatives  carried  out  under  this 
action. 

Action  two:  Support  the  dissemination  of  the  findings  of  the  European  Risk 
Observatory among the relevant actors 

The European Risk Observatory65 is an EU-OSHA initiative, which gathers, analyses and 
publishes information on emerging risks in order to help “anticipate change” and provide 
a platform for debate between experts and policy makers. Although research in this area 
is  actively carried out  and shared, the European  Risk  Observatory “brand” is  no longer 
being actively promoted.  

Action three: Identify and exchange good practice on ways to improve OSH conditions 
for specific categories of workers 

EU-OSHA has published a number of case studies, reports and discussion papers sharing 
good  practice  on  working  with  chronic  musculoskeletal  disorders  as  well  as  analysing 
trends  and  drivers  of  change  around  developments  in  information  and  communication 
technologies  (ICT),  the  digitalisation  of  work  and  other  emerging  issues  in  the 
workplace, including issues affecting specific types of workers.  

Action four: Promote rehabilitation and reintegration measures 

To  promote  rehabilitation  and  reintegration  measures,  among  others,  responding  to  the 
consequences of an ageing workforce, on the request of the European Parliament a 3-year 
pilot  project  ‘Safer  and  healthier  work  at  any  age’  was  initiated.  The  project  was 
managed  by  EU-OSHA  and  worked  towards  improving  knowledge  of  policies  and 
initiatives  addressing  the  ageing  of  the  workforce  and  their  implementation  across 
Europe, providing reliable information and analysis for policy development in the area of 
OSH, and facilitating the exchange of good practice.  

Action five: Identify and disseminate good practice on mental health problems at work 

EU-OSHA  published  several  reports  on  mental  health  in  the  workplace.  The  healthy 
workplaces campaign 2014-15 was also dedicated to the topic of managing work-related 
stress.  The European Commission  also  published in  2014 guidance on mental  health at 
work. This included guidance on implementing a comprehensive approach, to support for 
employers, employees and other stakeholders on the management of mental health issues 

65 EU-OSHA, European Risk Observatory, available at: https://osha.europa.eu/en/about-eu-osha/what-we-
do/european-risk-
observatory#:~:text=The%20aim%20of%20EU%2DOSHA's,and%20effectiveness%20of%20preventive%
20measures  

30 

 
                                                           
in  the  workplace  and  an  interpretative  document  on  the  implementation  of  the  OSH 
Framework Directive in relation to mental health in the workplace66.   

Further actions  

In  addition  to  the  actions  explicitly  listed  in  the  EU  strategic  framework,  a  number  of 
other developments have contributed towards objective five throughout the framework’s 
implementation  period.  This  applies  particularly  to  addressing  work-related  risks  and 
occupational  diseases,  especially  risks  posed  by  carcinogens  and  other  hazardous 
chemicals.  Key developments  have been the three  amendments  of the Carcinogens and 
Mutagens Directive19 (and a fourth proposal put forward by the Commission) and the two 
new lists of indicative OELs under the scope of the Chemical Agents Directive59, as well 
as  the  two  technical  updates  of  the  Biological  Agents  Directive49  (as  described  under 
objective  four).  However,  implementation  and  enforcement  of  legislation  is  the 
responsibility of (individual) Member States. It therefore remains to be seen whether the 
legislative changes will result in reduced exposure in the long-term. 

Another  important  development  at  EU  level  was  the  Roadmap  on  Carcinogens43, 
launched  in  2016,  that  brings  together  the  European  Commission,  EU-OSHA,  Member 
States and social partners to “promote awareness raising as well as the development and 
exchange  of  good  practices  that  prevent  or  reduce  exposure  to  carcinogens  at  the 
workplace”.  

In addition,  EU-OSHA  conducted and published a significant  body of research on  new 
and  emerging  risks  and  occupational  diseases  throughout  the  strategic  framework 
implementation period. This includes, for example, an OSH overview on musculoskeletal 
disorders,  a  foresight  project  looking  at  the  impact  of  rapid  developments  in  digital 
technologies on working conditions, and research published on alert and sentinel systems 
to catch early signs of work-related diseases.  

More recently, progress  was also noted in addressing violence and harassment at work. 
The Commission has proposed a Council Decision authorising Member States to ratify, 
in the interest of the European Union, the violence and harassment convention, 2019 (No. 
190) of the ILO67. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the urgency of dealing with 
issues such as violence in the workplace.  

In addition to EU-OSHA’s focus on “Healthy workplaces for all ages” during its 2016-
2017  healthy  workplaces  campaign,  several  other  initiatives  addressing  the  challenges 
related  to  demographic  change  in  the  workforce  took  place  within  the  framework’s 
implementation  period.  Notably,  the  European  Social  Partners  (BusinessEurope, 
UEAPME,  CEEP  and  ETUC,  and  the  liaison  committee  EUROCADRES/CEC)  agreed 

66 For more information see the European Commission website, available at: 
https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=716&langId=en  
67 
https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C190 

information 

following 

available 

under 

More 

the 

is 

link: 

31 

 
                                                           
through  the  social  dialogue  to  sign  an  autonomous  framework  agreement  in  2017  “on 
active  aging  and  an  inter-generational  approach”.  In  this  agreement,  they  committed  to 
promote  and  implement  tools  and  measures  to  facilitate  older  workers’  active 
participation and continuation in the labour market until the legal retirement age68.  

Activities carried out by Member States 

Although  none  of  the  specific  actions  under  objective  five  are  explicitly  ascribed  to 
Member  States,  it  nonetheless  appears  clear  that  Member  States  were  also  expected  to 
address the challenges related to the ageing workforce, emerging new risks, work-related 
and occupational diseases.  

Actions to address challenges related to the ageing workforce were identified in almost 
all Member States. These are mainly policy actions such as for example the development 
of a cross-policy strategic document, the priority of which is promoting the active life of 
older  people  in  the  field  of  employment  (Bulgaria);  awareness-raising  campaigns  on 
“Healthy jobs – regardless of age” (Estonia) or prioritisation of ageing workers in their 
general comprehensive health screening program  (mobile diagnostic centre) (Hungary). 
Czechia  and  Portugal  adopted  legal  measures  setting  more  stringent  health  checks  for 
older workers. 

Some  Member  States  (Austria,  Bulgaria,  Cyprus,  France,  Slovenia)  also  adopted  legal 
changes  and/or  policy  actions  related  to  female  workers.  For  example,  in  France,  the 
Labour Code has been amended to integrate a differentiated evaluation of the health and 
safety risks in the enterprise based on gender; in Cyprus, additional provisions have been 
included  in  the  relevant  regulations  providing  protection  to  pregnant  workers  and 
workers  who  recently  gave  birth  and  in  Austria,  an  inspection  campaign  on  the 
assessment of maternity protection in large enterprises was conducted. 

Specific  policy  actions  were  also  identified  in  certain  Member  States  with  regard  to 
disabled  workers  (Austria,  France,  Poland)  and  young  workers  (Austria,  Czechia, 
Lithuania, Slovenia).  

Various challenges related to the increased use of information technology and atypical 
contractual arrangements were highlighted by several Member States (such as Austria, 
Bulgaria,  Czechia,  Denmark,  Portugal,  France,  Latvia,  Slovenia,  Sweden,  Malta). 
However,  limited  legal  changes  to  adapt  OSH  legislation  to  new  types  of  work 
organisation,  and  no  policy  actions  to  address  these  changes,  were  reported  (with  the 
exception of Latvia).  

68 ETUC, 2019,  European Social Partners’ Autonomous Framework Agreement on Active Ageing and an 
Inter-generational Approach , viewed 22.01.2021, 
https://www.etuc.org/sites/default/files/circular/file/2019-
07/European%20Social%20Partners%E2%80%99%20Autonomous%20Framework%20Agreement%20on
%20Active%20Ageing.pdf 

32 

 
                                                           
  
Both  legal  changes  and  policy  actions  have  been  taken  by  several  Member  States  to 
address  the  risks  linked  to  new  technologies,  new  products  –  in  particular, 
nanomaterials – and new chemicals. The measures adopted are mainly policy measures, 
such  as  issuing  guidelines  on  managing  risks  related  to  nanomaterials  (e.g.  Austria), 
streamlining  the  work  of  labour  inspections  with  ECHA  recommendations  (Slovakia), 
supporting research (Czechia), adopting national strategies/ programmes in this field (e.g. 
Italy,  Poland),  organising  campaigns  (e.g.  Slovenia)  and  increasing  targeted  visits  (e.g. 
Austria, Portugal).  

Some  Member  States  adopted  legislative  changes  to  address  these  new  risks.  For 
example,  Germany  adopted  legislative  changes  related  to  hazardous  chemicals  and 
biological  agents  as  well  as  new  forms  of  cancers;  in  Belgium,  information  on 
nanomaterials  must  be  registered  in  order  to  ensure  information  is  passed  along  the 
supply  chain,  Slovenia  set  more  and  lower  OELs  for  certain  chemical  agents  and 
Slovakia adopted more stringent limit values for certain carcinogens and mutagens.  

f.  Objective  six:  Improve  statistical  data  collection  and  develop  the 

information base 

Objective  six  focuses  on  the  importance  of  reliable,  comparable  and  up  to  date  data  to 
facilitate robust and evidence-based policy making in the field of OSH. The EU strategic 
framework  identifies  specific  challenges  in  the  area  of  occupational  exposure, 
occupational disease and ill health, in particular. As far as the EU statistics on accidents 
at work are concerned, issues were identified with regard to under-reporting, in particular 
for  non-fatal  work  accidents.  Objective  six  therefore  focuses  on  the  need  for  common 
approaches  to  identify  and  measure  risks  to  workers’  safety  and  health  and  the 
importance of good quality data collection across the EU. 

The EU strategic framework indicates five main actions under objective six. The majority 
of the actions were to be implemented by the European Commission, with the support of 
national competent authorities. One action (examine options to improve information on 
costs and benefits of OSH) was not  allocated to  any specific actor. An overview of the 
actions, along with  the lead  actor  and the actors  with  a supporting role, is  presented in 
Table 7. 

Table 7: Summary of actions under objective six 

Action 

Lead actor 

Supporting actor 

Assess  and  improve  the  quality  of  data  on  accidents  at  work 
(ESAW) 

European Commission 

By  the  end  of  2016,  examine  options  to  improve  data  on 
occupational diseases at EU level 

European Commission 

Competent 
national 
authorities 

Competent 
national 
authorities 

Launch  discussions  within  ACSH  on  a common  database  on 
occupational exposures 

European 
ACSH and national experts 

Commission, 

N/A 

Before 2016, examine options to improve information on costs 
and benefits in the area of OSH 

N/A 

N/A 

33 

 
Before 2016, develop a tool to monitor the implementation of 
the EU strategic framework 2014-2020 

European Commission 

ACSH 

Progress against the actions under this objective has generally been consistent, although 
at  times  it  has  been  slow-paced,  primarily  due  to  divergences  that  still  exist  in  data 
reporting and occupational disease recognition practices at national level. Work has been 
carried  out  to  improve  the  reporting  of  data  on  accidents  at  work,  and  results  have 
emerged from initiatives to improve the availability of datasets on occupational diseases 
at EU level. 

Action one: Assess and improve the quality of data on accidents at work transmitted by 
Member  States  in  the  framework  of  the  European  Statistics  on  Accidents  at  Work 
(ESAW) data collection, with the aim of improving coverage, reliability, comparability 
and timeliness 

Under  the  provisions  of  Regulation  (EU)  349/201169,  Member  States  were  required  to 
provide  data  quality  assessments  on  accidents  at  work  statistics,  as  part  of  the  legal 
obligations of the countries that are providing the official statistics. Metadata information 
is  available  to  the  public  with  information  on  dimensions  such  as  coverage,  accuracy, 
timeliness and punctuality, in  an effort  to  strengthen data coherence  and comparability. 
However, feedback from the stakeholders consulted suggests that further improvements 
could  be  made,  especially  in  relation  to  addressing  under-reporting  of  non-fatal  work 
accidents and occupational diseases.  

EU-OSHA  published  the  OSH  Barometer  in  May  2020.  The  tool  is  the  result  of  an 
initiative  launched  by  the  European  Commission  in  2015  to  implement  some  of  the 
priorities  of  the  strategic  framework  2014-2020,  with  the  aim  of  monitoring  the  OSH 
situation in  the Member States on a permanent  basis. The  OSH  Barometer is  seen  as a 
significant  step  towards  making  OSH  data  more  transparent  and  easily  accessible  to 
relevant stakeholders and the public. There is room for further progress to be made – for 
example, indicators can be refined or expanded through a collaborative process.  

The  provision  of  high  quality  data  on  accidents  at  work  at  EU  level  is  dependent  on 
Member States collecting and sharing data of sufficient completeness and quality. Some 
Member  States  have  adopted  measures  to  improve  the  quality  of  data  on  accidents  at 
work.  The  efforts  of  Poland,  Spain,  Latvia,  Czechia,  Slovenia  and  Finland  are 
particularly noteworthy in this regard. 

Some Member States (for example, France and Spain), launched actions that have not yet 
been finalised or were abandoned.  

69  European  Commission,  2011,  Commission  Regulation  (EU)  No  349/2011  of  11  April  2011 
implementing  Regulation  (EC)  No  1338/2008  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on 
Community statistics on public health and health and safety at  work, as regards statistics on accidents at 
work 

34 

 
 
                                                           
Action  two:  By  the  end  of  2016,  examine  options  to  improve  data  on  occupational 
diseases at EU level 

The  European  Occupational  Diseases  Statistics  (EODS)  are  one  of  the  domains  where 
progress has been tangible, although relatively slow-paced.  

A pilot data collection project managed by Eurostat is underway and is currently classed 
as ‘experimental’. It involves 24 Member States70 that are providing data on recognised 
occupational diseases based on a short list of occupational diseases. The pilot builds on a 
previous  attempt  at  building  an  occupational  diseases  dataset  that  started  in  2000  of 
which  dissemination  was  discontinued  in  2009  due  to  comparability  issues.  The  new 
pilot, launched in 2017, seeks to overcome the harmonisation shortcomings highlighted 
during the previous project and established a European Index of Occupational Diseases, 
alongside  a  more  detailed  dataset.  The  pilot  phase  has  first  sought  to  understand 
differences in the recognition procedure of occupational diseases across Member States 
and  the  different  public  or  private  data  providers  involved,  a  crucial  step  to  ensure 
comparability  across  national  datasets.  The  pilot  relies  on  voluntary  contributions  from 
Member States, in the absence of a specific Implementing Regulation to collect and share 
statistics under Regulation (EC) 1338/2008 on Community statistics on public health and 
health and safety at work. Currently, data is published at EU-aggregate level from 2013 
onwards. EODS country profiles were published in the first quarter of 2021. 

The  stakeholders  consulted  agreed  that  the  main  factors  that  have  hindered  more 
significant  progress  in  this  area  were  the  lack  of  shared  definitions  and  a  centralised 
reporting system, the absence of binding requirements on Member States, and sometimes 
the absence of national provisions on data collection in relation to occupational diseases. 
The main obstacles to creating a European Union dataset, related to the question of which 
diseases are recognised as occupational diseases within Member States and according to 
which diagnostic and administrative criteria, are that there are significant discrepancies in 
this area.  

As  with  accidents  as  work,  high  quality  data  on  occupational  diseases  relies  on  the 
provision  of  complete  and  comparable  data  by  Member  States.  Overall,  only  a  few 
Member  States  appear  to  have  initiated  some  actions  to  improve  data  on  occupational 
diseases during the reporting period (Bulgaria, France, Portugal, Romania and Italy). 

Action  three:  Launch  discussions  within  ACSH  on  a  common  database  on 
occupational exposures 

Progress in relation to  a database on occupational exposures has been limited. In 2016, 
DG  EMPL  completed  a  pilot  study  (HazChem@Work),  which  consisted  of  a  database 
and a model to estimate the occupational exposure for a list of hazardous substances. The 
aim  of  the  project  was  to  explore  whether  the  collection  of  a  large  amount  of 

70 No data is available for Germany, Greece and Portugal.  

35 

 
                                                           
measurement  data  from  national  sources  could  improve  the  evidence-base  for  political 
priority  setting  and  decision  making  at  EU  level.  In  2018,  EU-OSHA  conducted  a 
feasibility study on the potential takeover and further development and extension of the 
HazChem@Work  database.  The  feasibility  study  presented  two  main  options,  the  first 
one not considering the development of the database, and the second being too ambitious 
to  be  carried  out  by  EU-OSHA.  However,  the  feasibility  study  concluded  that  other 
alternative options could be explored. Industry stakeholders pointed out that other work 
strand  in  this  area  is  seeking  to  assess  the  level  of  exposure  to  carcinogens  based  on  a 
computer-assisted telephone survey71, and that this approach could be a source of concern 
insofar as it relies on assessed rather than measured exposure. 

Action  four:  Before  2016,  examine  options  to  improve  information  on  costs  and 
benefits in the area of OSH 

At  EU  level,  EU-OSHA  has  released  a  visualisation  of  costs  and  benefits  of  OSH  that 
relies on data from a study carried out by the ILO, the Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs 
and  Health  ,  the  Finnish  Institute  of  Occupational  Health,  the  Workplace  Safety  and 
Health Institute in Singapore, the International Commission on Occupational Health and 
EU-OSHA.  The  aim  of  this  tool  is  to  develop  updated  worldwide  estimates  of  work-
related  injuries  and  illnesses.  The  statistics  are  based  on  available  data  at  international 
level,  mainly  relying  on  the  WHO  and  ILO  data  sources.  An  ACSH  working  party, 
which was planned to be set up on this issue, has not yet been established. 

The national research has shown that only a few Member States have adopted measures 
to  improve  information  on  costs  and  benefits  in  the  area  of  OSH  during  the  reference 
period: Czechia, Latvia, France and Germany.  In Austria and Spain, some evaluations on 
OSH were / are being carried out but the results are not publicly available.  

Action  five:  Before  2016,  develop  a  tool  to  monitor  the  implementation  of  the  EU 
strategic framework 2014-2020 

In  2015,  the  European  Commission  launched  an  initiative  to  implement  some  of  the 
priorities  of  the  strategic  framework  2014-2020,  with  the  aim  of  monitoring  the  OSH 
situation  in  the  Member  States  on  a  permanent  basis.  This  initiative  led  to  the 
development of the OSH Barometer, which was launched in 2020. The OSH Barometer 
helps to provide an overview of the situation in Member States and the extent to which 
their policies  and strategies align with  the EU strategic framework.  However, the OSH 
Barometer is not designed to monitor progress against all objectives and actions defined 
in the strategic framework, meaning there is still a gap in terms of monitoring of overall 
progress. 

g.  Objective  seven:  Better  coordinate  EU  and  international  efforts  to 

address OSH and engage with international organisations 

71  More 
figures/workers-exposure-survey-cancer-risk-factors-europe  

is  available  under 

information 

the  following 

link:  https://osha.europa.eu/en/facts-and-

36 

 
                                                           
Objective seven of the 2014-2020 EU strategic framework seeks to increase and improve 
the coordination and alignment of EU efforts to address OSH with those of other actors at 
the  international  level.  The  strategic  framework  defines  six  concrete  actions  to  work 
towards objective seven, all of which fall within the remit of the European Commission. 
Table 8 describes these actions. 

Table 8: Summary of actions under objective seven 

  EU-level action identified in the EU strategic framework 

  Lead actor 

  Supporting actor 

  Continue 

to  support  candidate  countries  during  accession 

  European 

  N/A 

negotiations 

Commission 

  Strengthen OSH cooperation with the ILO, WHO, and OECD 

  European 

  N/A 

Commission 

  Review the Memorandum of Understanding with the ILO to better 

  European 

  N/A 

reflect OSH policy 

Commission 

  Contribute  to  implementing  OSH  commitments  in  EU  free-trade 

  European 

  N/A 

and investment agreements 

Commission 

  Address OSH deficits in the global supply chain and contribute to 

  European 

  N/A 

G20 initiatives 

Commission 

  Strengthen  ongoing  cooperation  and  dialogue  on  OSH  with 

  European 

  N/A 

strategic partners 

Commission 

Notable progress has been observed in this area – particularly with regard to cooperating 
on data collection and the inclusion of OSH in international free trade agreements. 

Action one: Continue to support candidate countries during accession negotiations 

Units  within  DG  EMPL  are  working  with  candidate  countries  (including  Montenegro, 
Serbia, Albania and North Macedonia) to support them during accession negotiations by 
ensuring alignment of legislation, including alignment with chapter 19 of the acquis.  

Action two: Strengthen OSH cooperation with the ILO, WHO and OECD  

OSH cooperation between the European Commission and the ILO has been strengthened 
through  several  joint  initiatives.  In  February  2021,  both  parties  signed  a  renewed 
exchange  of  letters  to  update  the  framework  for  cooperation  between  the  two  entities. 
This  explicitly  named  the  promotion  of  occupational  safety  and  health  and  decent 
working conditions, including across global supply chains, as a key priority. 

37 

 
 
The  European  Commission  (through  DG  EMPL,  as  well  as  through  the  Directorate-
General for International Partnerships) is a member of the Global OSH Coalition, and is 
(since  2014)  one  of  the  donors  of  the  Vision  Zero  Fund  (VZF)72.  Further  collaboration 
and cooperation between the European Union and the  ILO can be seen in the scope of 
SLIC and EU-OSHA, where the ILO acts as an observer. ILO representatives were also 
invited  to  present  at  SLIC’s  annual  thematic  days.  The  European  Commission  also 
supports  the  work  of  the  ILO  and  WHO  on  the  update  of  chemical  safety  data  cards. 
Additionally,  cooperation  and  alignment  have  increased  in  the  area  of  data  collection 
regarding estimation of the burden from work-related injuries and diseases between the 
ILO, but also the WHO and EU-OSHA. 

Cooperation has been aided by the fact that objectives of the EU strategic framework on 
health and safety at work 2014-2020 were reflected in the works of  ILO. For example, 
the EU and its Member States supported the latest 2019 ILO centenary declaration for the 
future  of  work73  which  acknowledged  OSH  as  fundamental  for  decent  work.  The  
Commission has also proposed a Council Decision authorising Member States to ratify, 
in  the  interest  of  the  European  Union,  the  violence  and  harassment  convention  (No. 
190)66 of the ILO. Alignment and consistency of messaging between the ILO and the EU 
has  been  an  important  driver  for  success  in  supporting  candidate  countries  and 
neighbourhoods  in  adapting their OSH legislation, as pointed out  by one representative 
of the ILO.  

Action three: Review the memorandum of understanding with the ILO to better reflect 
OSH policy 

Despite  the  increasing  level  of  cooperation  between  the  EU  and  the  ILO,  the  action  to 
review the memorandum of understanding between the two to better reflect OSH policy 
has  not  progressed  as  far  as  might  have  been  expected  during  the  EU  strategic 
framework’s implementation period. However, stakeholders reported that work towards 
this  is  being  carried  out  and  the  process  of  review  is  ongoing.  A  memorandum  of 
understanding  between  the  EU,  the  European  Investment  Bank  and  the  ILO  was 
established in 2015. 

Action  four:  Contribute  to  implementing  OSH  commitments  in  EU  free-trade  and 
investment agreements  

The European Commission’s efforts to contribute to implementing OSH commitments in 
EU  free-trade  and 
the 
Comprehensive  Economic  and  Trade  Agreement  between  Canada  and  the  EU,  where 
OSH issues were given particular relevance in several articles of Chapter 23, as well as in 
the  Economic  Partnership  Agreement  between  the  EU  and  Japan.  Furthermore, 

investment  agreements  bore  fruit 

in  negotiations  for 

72 More information is available under the following link: https://www.ilo.org/vzf  
73 More information is available under the following link: https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/mission-
and-objectives/centenary-declaration/lang--tr/index.htm 

38 

 
                                                           
provisions  on  OSH  are  also  to  be  included  in  free-trade  agreements  currently  being 
negotiated.  

However, although the inclusion of OSH requirements was hailed as a success, questions 
have been raised by some of the stakeholders consulted regarding the extent to which the 
implementation of these requirements can be monitored. The fact that OSH is not one of 
the fundamental principles and rights at work is seen by some as an obstacle to ensuring 
a more active approach to push for implementation.   

Action  five:  Address  OSH  deficits  in  the  global  supply  chain  and  contribute  to  G20 
initiatives  

Some progress was also noted on the action to address OSH deficits in the global supply 
chain  and  contribute  to  G20  initiatives.  The  European  Commission  has  developed  and 
supported  a  number  of  projects  on  corporate  social  responsibility  and  global  supply 
chains,  such  as  the  ILO-EU  project  “OSH  in  global  supply  chains”74.  The  European 
Commission, through its membership of the G20, is contributing to bringing attention to 
OSH. In 2020, the G20 ministers affirmed their commitment to sharing best practices on 
OSH and on mitigating  measures to  improve occupational  safety  and health policies to 
protect workers, including those that have been impacted by COVID-19. 

Action  six:  Strengthen  ongoing  cooperation  and  dialogue  on  OSH  with  strategic 
partners 

In  addition  to  the  increased  cooperation  with  multilateral  organisations  (ILO,  WHO), 
cooperation  and  dialogue  with  some  strategic  partners  has  also  been  strengthened.  The 
European Commission has held annual joint events with China and cooperates on other 
bilateral initiatives related to OSH. Similarly, dialogue with the United States of America 
as another key strategic partner is considered very relevant. This has been implemented 
through joint events such as the 8th EU/US Joint conference in September 2015. 

3.4.  Relevance, effectiveness, coherence and EU added value. 

According to the  evidence  gathered, the 2014-2020 OSH strategic framework has been 
highly  relevant.  The  results  of  the  stocktaking  are  presented  below  in  terms  of  the 
framework’s relevance and its effectiveness, coherence and EU added value. 

1.1.1.  Relevance 

Evidence from the national and EU-level data collection points to a clear consensus that a 
strategic framework for OSH at European level was and remains highly relevant, both to 
help  ensure  consistency  between  Member  States  in  terms  of  workers  protection  and  to 
elevate  the  importance  of  workplace  health  and  safety  in  national  policy  debates.  Most 
stakeholders  consulted  appreciated  the  broad  scope  and  flexibility  of  the  EU  strategic 

74 
https://www.ilo.org/safework/projects/WCMS_522931/lang--en/index.htm 

information 

available 

under 

More 

is 

the 

following 

link: 

39 

 
                                                           
framework,  which  covers  most  of  the  priority  issues  identified  at  national  level. 
However, some stakeholders felt that a more robust, strategy or policy would have been 
desirable,  with  a  clearer  focus  on  a  reduced  number  of  key  priorities,  and/or  more 
specific objectives and targets.  

The three main challenges and the associated seven key strategic objectives identified in 
the  EU  strategic  framework  were  largely  perceived  as  corresponding  to  the  main 
problems  and  challenges  facing  the  EU  in  the  area  of  safety  and  health  at  work. 
Additionally, there was  strong support for including  concrete  actions and named  actors 
responsible  for  their  implementation.  However,  views  were  more  divided  regarding 
whether the actions and the actors identified to carry them out were sufficient to pursue 
the strategic objectives. 

1.1.2.  Effectiveness 

The evidence gathered has identified clear progress against all seven strategic objectives, 
resulting  from  the  implementation  of  the  different  actions  identified  within  the  EU 
strategic  framework.  A  review  of  progress  against  the  actions,  outputs  and  outcomes 
demonstrates  the  effectiveness  of  the  EU  strategic  framework  as  a  catalyst  to  action. 
Specifically, there is evidence of activity against all but one of the specified actions.  

The  2017  Communication  played  a  useful  role  in  ensuring  progress  continued  in  the 
latter  half  of  the  EU  strategic  framework’s  implementation  period.  The  2017 
Communication acted as an interim “stock-check”, identifying key areas of intervention 
and defining further priority actions to ensure the ambition of the EU strategic framework 
was  realised.  Actions  such  as  the  modernisation  of  EU  OSH  legislation  and  the 
development  of  OiRA  tools  were  identified  within  the  2017  Communication  and  this 
initiative appears to have helped maintain focus and momentum. 

The stocktaking has identified a number of promising outcomes under each of the seven 
objectives. Nonetheless, none of the objectives can be viewed as having been completely 
“achieved”.  This  is  due  in  part  to  the  nature  of  the  OSH  context,  which  involves  a 
constant  evolution  of  working  culture  and  a  concurrent  evolution  of  OSH  challenges. 
Additionally,  progress  in  addressing  the  three  challenges  identified  in  the  EU  strategic 
framework – while considerable – has been not at the same pace.  

1.1.3.  Coherence 

The  evidence  gathered  points  to  good  internal  coherence  within  the  EU  strategic 
framework, with some clear evidence of synergies and mutually beneficial effects from 
actions carried out under different strategic objectives. The framework also shows to be 
relatively  well  aligned  with  OSH  priorities  in  different  EU  Member  States,  suggesting 
clear coherence with national OSH policies and strategies across the EU. 

No  significant  overlaps  or  contradictions  were  identified  between  the  challenges, 
objectives and actions described in the EU strategic framework. The different elements of 
the  EU  strategic  framework  (i.e.  the  seven  strategic  objectives  and  the  corresponding 

40 

 
actions outlined underneath them) work with each other to address its overall objective of 
improving  OSH.  The  EU  strategic  framework  as  a  whole  identified  specific  issues  that 
pose barriers to better OSH and sets out actions to overcome these.  

The broad and crosscutting nature of the EU strategic framework’s objectives implies a 
clear  potential  complementarity  with  other  EU  policies.  Additionally,  there  is  clear 
alignment  between  the  EU  strategic  framework  and  the  work  of  international 
organisations,  particularly  the  ILO.  There  are  some  specific  examples  of  collaboration 
between different policy areas, particularly with regard to chemicals and trade. There is 
still room to further exploit potential interlinkages and synergies going forward in areas 
such as public health, the environment and industrial strategy.  

1.1.4.  EU added value 

The exact nature and extent of the EU strategic framework’s influence and added value 
varied  depending  on  the  Member  State  and  action  in  question.  As  the  EU  strategic 
framework is merely a “soft” policy document, and as such is not binding on any of the 
actors,  its  overall  influence  should  not  be  over-estimated.  Nonetheless,  the  research 
conducted shows that, by making priorities explicit, providing an overarching framework 
that links and contextualises the different activities, and calling on different stakeholders 
to take responsibility for concrete actions, the EU strategic framework did contribute to 
reinforcing  several  existing  and  launching  numerous  new  initiatives  at  both  EU  and 
national level.  

Additionally, the EU strategic framework has helped to ensure that OSH remains high on 
the agenda at EU level and in Member States, as well as on the international stage. It has 
also contributed to a more level playing field by helping to develop common standards 
and  tools  to  support  both  enforcement  and  compliance.  This  common  approach  can 
generate economies of scale across the EU and allows less advanced countries in a given 
area to learn from the more advanced ones. Some specific examples of the EU strategic 
framework’s added value include: 

•  The effort to review and align national OSH strategies represents a clear case of 
EU  ‘soft  power’,  whereby  commonly  defined  priorities  and  some  strategic 
impetus and support can contribute to positive changes at national level. 

•  The development of standardised campaigns, guidelines, support tools and other 
materials  that  can  be  adapted  to  different  national  circumstances  leads  to 
economies of scale and ensures that common standards and approaches are shared 
between EU Member States. 

•  Updating EU legislation ensures that national legislation remains fit for purpose, 

through the transposition and implementation of the revised directives. 

• 

It is clear that the EU as a whole has more leverage to insist on the inclusion of 
OSH  clauses  in  free  trade  agreements  than  Member  States  would  individually, 
which is another way in which the EU adds value. 

41 

 
3.5.  Conclusions from the stocktaking exercise 

The  EU  strategic  framework  has  provided  a  common  strategic  direction  in  support  of 
coordinated action to improve occupational safety and health and support at EU level. In 
particular: 

•  The  design  of  the  EU  strategic  framework  was  praised  for  its  conciseness  and 
clarity.  The  three  main  challenges  and  the  associated  seven  key  strategic 
objectives  largely  corresponded  to  the  main  problems  and  challenges  facing  the 
EU in the area of safety and health at work. Additionally, the decision to include 
concrete  actions  and  named  actors  responsible  for  their  implementation  under 
each objective provided a tangible roadmap to achieving the objectives.  

•  Evidence from the national  and EU-level  data collection points to  good  internal 
coherence of the EU strategic framework, with some clear evidence of synergies 
and mutually beneficial effects from actions carried out under different strategic 
objectives.  In  general,  the  challenges  and  priorities  align  well  with  those 
identified at national level. 

•  Most  stakeholders  consulted  appreciated  the  broad  scope  and  flexibility  of  the 
current  EU  strategic  framework,  which  covers  most  of  the  priority  issues 
identified  at  national  level.  The  strategic  framework  provides  much-needed 
flexibility  for  different  countries  and  actors  to  implement  and  adapt  the  quite 
broad array of EU-level priorities in a pragmatic way, responding to the specific 
needs of the national, sectoral and temporal context. 

•  However, some of the stakeholders consulted felt that a more robust strategy or 
policy  (such  as  the  preceding  2007-2012  Community  strategy  on  health  and 
safety  at  work75)  would  have  been  desirable,  with  a  clearer  focus  on  a  reduced 
number of key priorities, and/or more specific objectives and targets. Those who 
supported this option believed it would provide more impetus and accountability 
for progress on OSH-related issues. 

•  Additionally,  some  stakeholders  identified  a  slight  disconnect  between  the 
challenges identified and some of the concrete objectives and actions included in 
the  strategy.  In  particular,  they  missed  a  clearer  link  between  the  challenges 
identified and the actions described under objectives four and seven.  

Although it is difficult to measure concrete impacts, which can be clearly attributed to the 
EU  strategic  framework,  a  number  of  conclusions  can  be  drawn  with  regard  to  its 
influence. Additionally, in some areas, there is strong evidence to support a “contribution 

75 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic 
and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  “Improving  quality  and  productivity  at  work: 
Community strategy 2007-2012 on health and safety at work”, COM(2007) 62 final 

42 

 
 
                                                           
story”  linking  the  actions  carried  out  to  broader  effects  (some  of  which  have  already 
materialised, while others appear likely to follow in the near future): 

•  Firstly,  there  is  a  clear  consensus  among  stakeholders  at  all  levels  on  the 
importance  of  having  a  framework  at  European  Union  level.  The  EU  strategic 
framework provides a common reference for Member States when designing their 
own OSH strategies and policies. Additionally, it lends weight to considerations 
on health and safety in broader political and strategic discussions (both within the 
Members States and on the international stage). 

•  There  is  also  clear  evidence  that  the  EU  strategic  framework  has  contributed  to 
significant  progress  on  improving  OSH  culture  within  the  EU,  despite  a  certain 
degree of variation depending on the specific objectives and actions in question.  

•  The  EU  strategic  framework  was  identified  as  an  important  reference  for  many 
stakeholders,  particularly  national  competent  authorities,  who  have  used  it  to 
prioritise  action  on  OSH  at  national  level.  Additionally,  social  partners  have 
found  it  to  be  a  useful  tool  both  to  lobby  for  an  increased  focus  on  OSH 
generally,  and  to  increase  attention  on  specific  issues  such  as  musculoskeletal 
disorders and psychosocial risks. 

•  The  inclusion  of  OSH  in  free  trade  agreements,  as  well  as  high-level  bilateral 
discussions  on  OSH  matters  with  leading  economies,  have  elevated  the 
importance of workplace health and safety on the global stage and positioned the 
EU as a leading actor in this field. 

•  The EU strategic framework (and the 2017 Communication) have supported the 
revision of the EU OSH  acquis, leading to  the updating of six key directives in 
this field. 

3.6.  Recommendations identified in the stocktaking exercise 

With  regard  to  the  design  of  a  future  EU  strategic  framework,  the  stocktaking  has 
identified a trade-off between broad scope and flexibility of design, on the one hand, and 
focus  on  a  limited  number  of  core  priorities  and  accountability  in  terms  of  monitoring 
progress, on the other. Striking the right balance between these two – taking into account 
the political and socio-economic context at the time – is key for maximising the success 
of the future framework. 

One specific approach that could help the future strategic framework strike this balance – 
and to  some extent achieve the “best  of both  worlds”  – would be to combine a longer-
term  strategy  with  shorter-term  action  plans.  Building  on  the  success  of  the  2017 
Communication  in  revisiting  the  EU  strategic  framework’s  priorities  and  actions  at  the 
mid-point (in 2017), a future strategic framework could be accompanied by shorter-term 
priorities and implementation plans of approximately two or three years duration. These 

43 

 
 
would  focus  on  operationalising  the  aims  contained  within  the  higher-level  strategic 
framework.  In  addition  to  named  stakeholders  and  timeframes  for  implementation, 
shorter-term  implementation  plans  could  include  for  example  concrete  indicators  to 
monitor ongoing progress and increase transparency between different stakeholders. 

Stakeholder feedback has also highlighted resource constraints as a significant barrier to 
OSH  implementation  within  Member  States.  It  may  therefore  be  appropriate  to 
investigate  possibility  to  build  bridges  with  existing  funding  streams  (such  as  the 
European  Social  Fund)  in  order  to  help  stakeholders  access  financial  support  for 
implementation of actions identified in a future strategic framework. 

Emerging priorities identified in the stocktaking exercise 

The main priorities that have emerged from the research and consultation activities for a 
potential future strategic framework can be summarised as follows: 

-  Firstly, there is a need to remain focused on the challenges and issues identified in 
the  EU  strategic  framework  2014-2020.  Occupational  diseases,  demographic 
change, psychosocial risks and musculoskeletal disorders have only increased in 
importance in recent years. Additionally, there is a continued need to support both 
labour inspectorates and companies to improve OSH standards. 

-  Stakeholders consulted also underlined the need to consider more traditional OSH 
challenges (including workplace accidents and risks such as falling from heights, 
or in  the agricultural  and construction sectors)  which risk being  overlooked if  a 
future strategic framework prioritises emerging risks too strongly. 

-  Consideration  should  also  be  given  to  the  impacts  of  a  number  of  longer-term 
trends in the world of work. Issues such as increasingly globalised supply chains, 
a  move  towards  more  flexible  and  atypical  labour,  a  transition  towards 
teleworking  and  increased  digitalisation  all  have  implications  for  the  future 
implementation  of  OSH.  Further  consideration  should  be  given 
the 
opportunities and risks associated with these emerging trends.  

to 

-  Ensuring  OSH  protections  are  fit  for  purpose  with  regard  to  different  types  of 
workers and that differentiated impacts on different groups have been thoroughly 
taken into account. This particularly applies to migrant workers, those employed 
in the gig economy, platform workers and those working in the domestic sphere 
(including  in-home  private  carers,  cleaners  and  teleworkers).  The  gendered 
impacts  of  OSH  as  well  as  specific  considerations  required  for  those  with 
disabilities should also be considered. 

-  Taking into account the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on workplace health 
and  safety,  consideration  should  also  be  given  to  broader  global  trends  such  as 
climate change and the potential for future pandemics and how these may impact 
on  the  workplace  of  the  future  (for  example,  the  impacts  of  retrofitting 
programmes  on  potential  exposure  to  asbestos  and  the  implications  of  the 

44 

 
transition  to  a  low  economy).  A  holistic  approach  to  OSH,  including 
mainstreaming OSH  considerations  into areas such as environmental  policy  and 
public health could help to increase resilience in the face of future challenges. 

4.  ASSESSMENT OF THE NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS  

4.1.  Context  

In  the  area  of  OSH,  the  Commission  is  required,  every  five  years,  to  produce  a  single 
report  based  on  an  evaluation  of  the  practical  implementation  of  the  EU  OSH 
framework76, comprising Framework Directive 89/391/EEC3, which is the main piece of 
legislation in this area, and 23 related directives (see Annex 2). To help Member States 
prepare  the  first  national  practical  implementation  reports,  covering  the  period  2007  to 
2012,  the  Commission  adopted  the  structure  and  questionnaire  for  these  reports  in 
Commission Decision C/2011/920077.  

In 2017, a major in-depth and comprehensive ex-post evaluation of the implementation 
of  the  Framework  Directive  and  of  23  related  directives  in  27  Member  States78  was 
carried out, as part of the REFIT programme46. The analysis was based, on the one hand, 
on  reports  on  the  practical  implementation  of  the  directives  from  all  Member  States 
(including the views  of the social  partners  - trade unions and employers'  organisations) 
and, on the other hand, on a report by an independent external contractor. In addition, the 
Commission  used  the  experience  it  gained  from  monitoring  the  transposition  and 
application  of  the  directives  in  the  Member  States.  The  evaluation  included  specific 
consultations of social partners, including organisations representing SMEs. 

The ex-post evaluation provided an opportunity to take stock of and evaluate the various 
aspects  of  the  practical  implementation  of  the  EU  directives,  and  covered  relevance, 
effectiveness, coherence aspects as well as research and new scientific knowledge. It had 
a  special  focus  on  SMEs  of  the  legislation  as  well  as  aspects  related  to  avoiding 
unnecessary regulatory burden.  

76  The  national  implementation  reports  are  transmitted  by  the  Member  States  in  accordance  with  Article 
17a  of  the  Framework  Directive;  Article  22  of  Directive  2009/148/EC;  Article  10a  of  Directive 
91/383/EEC; Article 9a of  Directive 92/29/EEC and Article 17a of Directive 94/33/EC 
77 Commission Decision  C/2011/9200 of 20 December 2011 notified to Member States on 21 December 
2011 on defining the structure and questionnaire for the practical implementation report to be drawn up by 
the Member States regarding Directive 89/391/EEC, its individual Directives, and Directives 2009/148/EC, 
91/383/EEC, 92/29/EEC and 94/33/EC 
78 Croatia was not yet a Member State during the period of the first evaluation 

45 

 
 
                                                           
Its results were described in detail in the staff working document “Ex-post evaluation of 
the  European  Union  occupational  safety  and  health  directives  (REFIT  evaluation)” 
accompanying the Communication COM(2017) 12 final79.  

The  second  national  practical  implementation  reports  covered  the  period  from  2013  to 
2017 included. Member States were required to transmit their report by the end of 2018 
at the latest. To facilitate the drafting and submission of these reports, the Commission 
services  referred  Member  States  to  the  Commission  Decision  C/2011/920080  and  asked 
the  national  authorities  to  reply  to  few  questions  raising  general  points  that  are  more 
directly  relevant  to  the  context  of  the  second  report  to  which  the  Member  States  were 
invited to reply.  

The  questionnaire  for  the  drawing  up  of  the  practical  implementation  reports  by  the 
Member States laid down in Commission Decision C/2011/9200 contains a section with 
the  principles  and  points  common  to  all  directives  concerned  (e.g.  general  statistical 
information  and  information  on  the  general  principles  of  risk  prevention),  and  another 
that  deals  with  particular  aspects  of  each  directive.  In  addition  to  the  questionnaire, 
Member States received an informative document, which referred to a number of general 
issues,  such  as  whether  there  have  been  changes  to  the  legal  framework  and  what 
Member State saw as key future OSH challenges. 

The following chapters present the national measures to achieve the key objectives of the 
EU  strategic  framework  on  health  and  safety  at  work  2014-20202  and  an  overview  on 
how Member States have transposed/implemented the different OSH directives.  

4.2.  Measures  to  achieve  the  key  objectives  of  the  EU  strategic  framework 
on  health  and  safety  at  work  2014-2020  in  national  implementation 
reports 

The  national  implementation  reports  show  that  the  type  of  measures  adopted  by  the 
Member  States  to  achieve  the  objectives  of  the  EU  strategic  framework  on  health  and 
safety  at  work  2014-20202  varies  depending  on  the  subject  matter  and  the  national 
context. For example, Member States mainly reported non-binding/soft-law measures to 
facilitate  compliance  with  OHS  legislation,  while  emerging  risks  and  enforcement  and 
simplification  of  OSH  legislation  were  addressed  through  both  legal  and  non-legal 
measures.    

79  Staff  Working  Document  “Ex-post  evaluation  of  the  European  Union  occupational  safety  and  health 
Directives  (REFIT  evaluation)”  SWD(2017)  9  accompanying  Communication  from  Commission  to  the 
European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  Regions 
“Safer and Healthier Work for All  -Modernisation of the EU Occupational Safety and Health Legislation 
and Policy” COM(2017)12 final 
80  Commission  Decision  of  20.12.2011  defining  the  structure  and  questionnaire  for  the  practical 
implementation  report  to  be  drawn  up  by  the  Member  States  regarding  Directive  89/391/EEC,  its 
individual Directives, and Directives 2009/148/EC, 91/383/EEC, 92/29/EEC and 94/33/EC 

46 

 
 
 
                                                           
Next  section  provides  an  analysis  of  the  concrete  measures  and  actions  adopted  at 
national level by each of the key objectives of the 2014-2020 strategic framework. 

4.2.1.  Measures  and  actions  adopted  by  Member  States  by  key 

objectives 

Based on the national implementation reports, the national measures taken have a clear 
focus on certain  of the six objectives  addressed to Member States81 of the  EU strategic 
framework on health and safety at work 2014-2020 rather than others. 

The objectives of the strategic framework where more national measures were identified 
are: 

a.  Further consolidate national strategies (objective one):  

Member  States  adopted  new  national  OSH  strategies  between  2014  and  2020.  The 
national implementation reports indicate that, within the 2013-2017 reporting period, the 
following Member States adopted national strategies outlining their content and scope:   

 

In  Belgium,  the  national  strategy  2016-2020  on  wellbeing  at  work  covered  all 
elements in the EU strategic framework, with an emphasis on psychosocial risks, 
musculoskeletal disorders, carcinogenic substances and support for SMEs. 

  Bulgaria’s  national  health  strategy  for  2018-2020  targeted  increased  working 
capacity  and  reduced  mortality  among  those  in  the  economically  active  groups 
(aged between 20 and 65). 

 

In  Germany,  the  OSH  strategy  2013-2018  conducted  a  comprehensive  risk 
assessment  and  then  focused  on  ‘organisation’,  ‘musculoskeletal  diseases’  and 
‘mental health’ work programmes. A specific German risk minimisation strategy 
was developed by the Hazardous Substances Committee.  

  Greece’s  national  strategy  for  health  and  safety  at  work  2014-2020  focused  on 
creating  safer,  healthier,  and  more  productive  workplaces  in  the  private  and 
public  sectors,  promoting  workers’  health  and  well-being,  and  contributing  to 
business sustainability and economic growth. 

  Spain’s national strategy for occupational safety and health 2015-2020 focused on 
providing  information  and  raising  awareness  (especially  for  SMEs),  preventing 
workplace risks, developing public tools to facilitate enforcement and standardise 
preventive  management  in  SMEs,  promoting  the  integration  of  prevention,  and 
the  coordination  of 
developing  and  disseminating 
entrepreneurial activities. 

facilitate 

tools 

to 

81 All actions under objective seven fell within the remit of the European Commission 

47 

 
 
                                                           
  Hungary’s  national  strategy  2016-2022  sets  22  priority  areas  that  focus  on 
improving the competitiveness of undertakings, safeguarding workers’ capacity to 
work, developing training and education in the field of health and safety at work, 
improving  information  and  communication,  and  promoting  OSH  research  and 
development. 

 

 

Ireland’s Health and Safety Authority adopted a  strategy for the period of 2016-
2018  based  on  the  provisions  of  the  EU  strategic  framework,  the  national  and 
European strategy on chemicals, and international trends and practices.  

In Lithuania, the national strategy for 2017-2021 sets out measures to improve the 
OSH  legal  framework,  enhance  the  prevention  of  work-related  diseases,  ensure 
the  competence  of  the  State  labour  inspectors  and  occupational  healthcare 
specialists,  and  improve  the  process  of  testing  employers’  and  employees’ 
knowledge.  

  Portugal’s  national  strategy  for  health  and  safety  at  work  2015-2020  (‘For  safe, 
healthy and productive work’ 2015-2020) provided an overall policy framework 
on occupational risk prevention and the promotion of well-being at work.  

 

 

In  Romania,  the  national  strategy  for  2018-2020  included  measures  for  SMEs, 
such  as  preparing  a  national  summary  report  on  the  trends  of  occupational 
diseases  at  national  level,  updating  the  legislative  framework  on  the  status  of 
occupational  health  physicians,  and  collating  a  list  of  workplaces  and  workers 
with occupational exposure to carcinogens.  

In  Slovakia¸  the  OSH  strategy  2016-2020  focused  on  the  development  of 
sustainable and decent working conditions to maintain a low rate of accidents at 
work  (in  particular  accidents  that  are  fatal  or  result  in  lifelong  consequences), 
eliminate  the  causes  of  occupational  diseases,  improve  prevention,  and  enhance 
work culture. 

b.  Facilitate compliance with OSH legislation (objective two): 

In order to facilitate compliance with OSH legislation, Member States have put in place a 
range  of  measures,  including  financial  and  technical  support  for  the  implementation  of 
OiRA and IT-based tools, development of guidance and guides (e.g. leaflets, brochures), 
organisation  of  awareness-raising  campaigns  (e.g.  seminars,  workshops,  training), 
development of online information and databases, OSH projects and funding.  

According  to  the  national  implementation  reports  for  2013-2017,  10  Member  States 
introduced  OiRA  to  support  SMEs  to  carry  out  risk  assessments.  As  an  example, 
Belgium  developed  OiRA  tools  in  sectors  such  as  hairdressing,  wood  processing, 
construction, cleaning, hotel and catering, and bakeries. Latvia developed OiRA tools in 

48 

 
 
sectors  such  as  education,  shops,  agricultural  enterprises,  car  maintenance  and  repair, 
road transport and doctors’ practices).  

Several Member States introduced other IT-based tools. For example, BeSMART82 (in 
Ireland)  enables  SMEs  and  micro  enterprises  to  carry  out  a  risk  assessment  and  put 
control  plans  in  place,  the    INAIL  website83  (in  Italy)  provides  tools  for  businesses  to 
calculate the costs of non-compliance with OSH requirements and the SEIRICH tool84 (in 
France) supports chemical risk management. 

Several  Member  States  during  the  2013-2017  reporting  period  offered  guidance 
supporting the implementation of OSH legislation. In most cases, the guidance consisted 
of the dissemination of information (such as in Bulgaria, Belgium, Czechia and Ireland). 
Other examples are: Cyprus and Ireland, where inspectors offer businesses explanations 
and guidance during OSH inspections; Denmark, where special guidance was provided to 
SMEs;  and  Italy,  that  issued  guidance  to  businesses  (especially  SMEs)  on  the  means, 
tools  and  operating  methods  to  reduce  OSH  risk  levels,  identify  technological 
innovations for prevention purposes, improve the quality of company safety management 
systems and develop good practices. 

Several  Member  States  also  published  OSH  guides,  and  most  of  the  Member  States 
produced leaflets and brochures. 

Most  of  the  Member  States  launched  OSH  awareness-raising  campaigns  targeting 
SMEs.  Other  topics  covered,  for  example,  carcinogenic  working  materials  (Austria), 
psychosocial  risks  and  musculoskeletal  disorders  (Belgium)  and  young  workers 
(Sweden). 

Between  2013  and  2017,  several  Member  States  also  organised  other  activities  such  as 
seminars, exhibitions, competitions, workshops, training and conferences. 

c.  Better enforcement of OSH legislation (objective three) 

Measures  to  improve  enforcement  of  OSH  legislation  covered  resources  dedicated  to 
labour inspectorates, adoption of new legislation, introduction of new tools for inspection 
(non-legal measures) and soft measures, such as information materials, guidance, training 
and risk assessment tools.  

Overall,  the  resources  and  capacity  of  labour  inspectorates,  in  relation  to  both  the 
number  of  inspectors  and  the  number  of  inspections,  decreased  in  nearly  all  Member 
States during the 2013-2017 reporting period. The total number of inspectors decreased 
in  nearly  all  Member  States  between  2013  and  2017,  with  the  following  exceptions: 
Estonia,  Malta,  France,  Hungary  Latvia  and  Slovakia.  The  number  of  inspections  per 

82 More informationn is available under the following link: https://www.besmart.ie 
83 More information is available under the following link: www.inail.it 
84 More information is available under the following link: www.seirich.fr 

49 

 
                                                           
100,000  workers  also  decreased  in  nearly  all  Member  States  (except  in  Estonia, 
Lithuania,  Finland  and  Malta).  On  the  contrary,  the  number  of  workers  per  labour 
inspector  increased  in  nearly  all  Member  States  between  2013-2017,  except  Estonia, 
Latvia, Malta and Slovakia, where the number decreased.   

Six Member State national  implementation  reports (Czechia, Hungary, Estonia, France, 
Latvia  and  Sweden)  mentioned  new  legal  measures  that  were  introduced  over  the 
reporting  period  to  improve  enforcement  of  OSH  legislation.  For  example,  France, 
adopted an Ordinance in 2016 and extended the possibility for labour inspectors to issue 
stop-work  orders  in  situations  of  risk  of  height  falls  and  exposure  to  asbestos  in  all 
sectors (previously limited to construction) and Hungary adopted a new law to penalise 
breaches  of  health  and  safety  obligations  committed  by  natural  persons  (primarily 
workers) through administrative fines.  

With  regard  to  the  adoption  of  new  methods  or  non-legal  measures  to  improve  the 
enforcement of OSH legislation, three Member States reported the adoption of measures: 
Denmark (where a new method of inspection for the building and construction industry 
has  been tested), Finland (where inspections are increasingly carried out  in  the form  of 
projects within specific sectors) and Lithuania (where control questionnaires for carrying 
out inspections where introduced).  

On  the  contrary,  all  Member  States  implemented  soft  measures  to  foster  behavioural 
change,  raise  awareness  and  improve  the  implementation  of  OSH  legislation  among 
employers and workers. These soft measures included the dissemination of information 
sheets, websites, guides, campaigns, training and workshops, and the development of risk 
assessment tools.  

d.  Address emerging risks: prevention of occupational diseases (objective five) 

More  than  half  of  the  national  implementation  reports  referred  to  measures  targeting 
emerging risks stemming from work-related stress and psychosocial risks, and new risks 
linked  to  chemical  substances.  Several  reported  the  adoption  of  specific  measures 
relating  to  musculoskeletal  disorders  and  biological  agents.  These  are  mainly  soft  law 
measures to raise awareness, but some Member States also adopted legal measures, such 
as amending or introducing new acts.  

In  relation  to  work-related  stress  and  psychosocial  risks,  seven  Member  States 
(Austria,  Belgium,  Croatia,  Estonia,  Germany,  Finland  and  Lithuania)  adopted  legal 
measures,  amending or introducing  new  acts  with the aim to  prevent  these risks. Other 
Member States, such as Czechia, Malta and Romania, put in place non-legal measures to 
raise  awareness  and  help  to  prevent  work-related  stress  and  psychosocial  risks.  These 
measures  include  targeted  conferences,  specific  training  courses,  monitoring  and 
research. 

To address new chemicals and hazardous substances, five Member States reported the 
amendment of their national legislation on exposure limit values for chemical substances 
and/or  their  lists  of  dangerous  substances.  Other  measures  include,  among  others,  the 

50 

 
amendment of the list of prohibited work for persons under 18 and the list of agents that 
are toxic and hazardous to their health (Lithuania), a mix of legal and non-legal measures 
to control risks linked to exposure to chemical substances (Finland, Hungary, Malta and 
Portugal) and research, conferences, trainings and awareness-raising activities in relation 
to the management of chemical risks (Finland, Malta, Romania and Portugal).  

Some  Member  States  have  also  address  musculoskeletal  disorders.  For  example, 
Germany added musculoskeletal strain to its list for recommended preventive care in the 
annex  to  the  Ordinance  on  Preventive  Occupational  Health  Care  and  Belgium,  Finland 
and Romania launched information campaigns and guides on preventing musculoskeletal 
disorders. 

Finally,  certain  Member  States  reported  measures  in  relation  to  the  prevention  of  risks 
arising from exposure to biological agents. In this respect, France focused on viruses and 
zoonosis  in  the  context  of  the  implementation  of  Directive  2000/54/EC,  on  Biological 
Agents49,  developing  factsheets  on  the  most  common  zoonosis  at  the  workplace  (e.g. 
agriculture) with the aim to improve risk assessments and preventive measures. Another 
example can be found in Sweden, where the Working Environment Authority developed 
new regulations on the risk of infection in 2018. These regulations have a stronger focus 
on  hygiene  routines  and  prevention  and  include  clearer  obligations  for  the  washing  of 
work clothing worn for certain tasks. 

The analysis of the national implementation reports identified other objectives of the EU 
strategic framework where fewer measures were taken at national level. This is the case 
of the following objectives: 

e.  Improve  statistical  data  collection  and  develop  the  information  base 

(objective six) 

Croatia,  Italy  and  the  Netherlands  reported  the  adoption  of  measures  to  improve  the 
collection  and  quality  of  statistical  data  on  work-related  accidents  and  occupational 
diseases.  For  example,  Croatia  centralised  its  data  collection  and  processing  on  OSH 
matters  within  the  national  Institute  for  Occupational  Safety  Improvement  (Data 
Collector) or Italy introduced technical rules for the implementation and operation of an 
OSH National Information System, as well as rules on data processing. 

By contrast, several national implementation reports mentioned challenges in collecting 
data  (such  as  the  lack  of  available  data).  Hungary,  Malta,  Portugal  and  Slovenia  all 
mentioned  the  lack  of  data  on  the  number  of  cancer  deaths  that  can  be  attributed  to 
occupational  exposure  to  carcinogens  or  asbestos.  The  French  national  implementation 
report noted difficulties in collecting data. For example, the data on the number of fatal 
accidents at work are collected by the National Health Insurance Fund and cover mainly 
private sector workers.  

f.  Address ageing workforce (objective five) 

51 

 
 
Seven Member States reported specific measures targeting ageing workers. The issue of 
an  ageing  workforce  is  treated  as  a  crosscutting  theme  to  be  achieved  through  broader 
OSH policies for creating healthier work environments.  

Four  Member  States  (Croatia,  Greece,  Luxembourg  and  Slovakia)  launched  specific 
campaigns,  organised  workshops  and  developed  tools  to  address  the  issue  of  ageing 
workforce. The labour inspectorate in  Luxembourg organised two conferences (in 2016 
and 2017) on this topic; Croatia planned several events promoting sustainable work and 
healthy  ageing;  and  the  Ministry  of  Labour  and  Social  Affairs  in  Greece  produced  a 
guide  for  the  protection  of  older  workers,  along  with  workshops  in  nine  cities  during 
2017.     

On  the  other  hand,  Bulgaria,  Estonia  and  Germany  adopted  more  comprehensive 
measures. Bulgaria launched a funding scheme for SMEs; in Estonia, a reform is planned 
in the near future to prevent the decrease of work ability and retain workers in the labour 
market for as long as possible and in Germany a piece of legislation on OSH was recast 
in 2015 to include complementary and more precise rules on ergonomics to ensure age 
and ageing-appropriate work structures.  

g.  Simplify existing legislation (objective four) 

The  simplification  of  existing  legislation  includes  both  general  amendments  to  the 
legislation and amendments targeting better transposition and implementation of the EU 
OSH acquis.  

Measures  to  eliminate  unnecessary  administrative  burden  for  employers  were 
identified in  nine national  implementation  reports (Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, 
Italy,  Lithuania,  Portugal,  Malta  and  Sweden).  The  main  type  of  measure  was 
amendments  to  existing  legislation  with  the  aim  of  cutting  red  tape  by  reducing  the 
intervals  for  inspections  and  formal  consultation,  and  reducing/simplifying  procedures 
linked  to  employers’  reporting  requirements.  For  example,  Austria,  Bulgaria,  Hungary 
and Lithuania amended existing legislation in order to reduce unnecessary administrative 
burden, while Croatia and Portugal adopted amendments to reduce the overall number of 
OSH legal acts. Finally, Croatia, Malta and Sweden introduced non-legislative action to 
improve and simplify legislation. 

Bulgaria, France, and Sweden reported measures to simplify the national transposition 
and  implementation  of  specific  EU  OSH  directives.  Bulgaria  amended  the  national 
regulations  transposing  Directive  91/383/EEC  on  Temporary  Work5  and  Directive 
89/654/EEC  on  Workplaces55  to  reduce  unnecessary  administrative  burden.  France 
established  a  Working  Group  in  2019  under  the  Council  of  Orientation  of  Working 
Conditions  to  simplify  the  legislation  on  the  prevention  of  chemical  risk.  Sweden 
simplified  the  requirements  for  written  documentation  under  the  law  transposing  the 
OSH Framework Directive3, depending on the size of the undertaking. 

52 

 
 
4.3.  Overview and analysis on how Member States have transposed/implemented 

the different OSH directives  

4.3.1.  Overview  on  practical  implementation  of  the  OSH  directives, 

based on national implementation reports 2013-2017  

Overall,  Member  States  adopted  measures  in  addition  to  the  provisions  of  the  OSH 
Framework Directive3 and 23 related directives (see Annex 2). There are some exception: 
Directive  91/383/EEC  on  Temporary  Work5,    Directive  2004/40/EC  repealed  by 
Directive 2013/35/EU41 on Electromagnetic Fields) and Directive 2003/10/EC on Noise 
at Work85). In these cases few, if any, additional national measures were identified in the 
national implementation reports for the period 2013-2017.  

In  some  cases,  it  is  unclear  if  those  additional  measures  are  more  stringent  than  the 
provisions of the directive in question, or if the measures were adopted before the 2013-
2017 reporting period.   

Member  States  reported  issues  in  implementing  some  of  the  EU  OSH  directives  at 
national  level,  most  frequently  in  relation  to  the  rules  transposing  directives  regulating 
workers’ exposure to chemicals (Directive 2004/37/EC on Carcinogens and Mutagens19; 
Directive  98/24/EC  on  Chemical  Agents59)  and  Directive  92/57/EEC  on  Construction 
Sites86.  

The  problems  identified  in  the  national  implementation  reports  typically  concerned 
SMEs  and  often  related  to  lack  of  financial  resources,  knowledge  of  the  applicable 
requirements and the complexity of those requirements.  

Member  States  have  also  reported  gaps  in  respect  of  certain  directives  and  flagged  the 
need  to  update  Directive  89/654/EEC  on  Workplaces55  and  Directive  90/270/EEC  on 
Display Screen Equipment56) to reflect technological developments. 

Next section presents an analysis of these key findings on the practical implementation of 
EU OSH legislation at Member State level. 

85  Directive  2003/10/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  6  February  2003  on  the 
minimum  health  and  safety  requirements    regarding  the  exposure    of  workers  to  the  risk  arising  from 
physical agents (noise) (seventeenth individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 
89/391/EEC), OJ L 42, 15.2.2003, p.38 
86  Council  Directive  92/57/EEC  of  24  June  1992  on  the  implementation  of  minimum  safety  and  health 
requirements  at  temporary  or  mobile  construction  sites  (eight  individual  directive  within  the  meaning  of 
Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC), OJ L 245, 26.8.1992, p.6 

53 

 
 
                                                           
4.3.2.  Analysis  and  main  findings  on  how  Member  States  have 

transposed/implemented the different OSH directives 

As indicated in the overview above, many Member States have reported the adoption of 
more stringent and/or additional measures in their national legislation transposing the 
OSH  directives  during  the  period  2013-2017.  However,  Directive  91/383/EEC  on 
Temporary  Work5,  Directive  2004/40/EC  repealed  by  Directive  2013/35/EU  on 
Electromagnetic  Fields41  and  Directive  2003/10/EC  on  Noise  at  Work84  can  be 
considered  exceptions,  as  only  a  small  number  of  Member  States  reported  additional 
measures.   

It has to be noted that where additional measures were reported, the extent to which they 
go beyond the provisions of the directive in question, and whether they were taken before 
the 2013-2017 reporting period, was often unclear.  

Many additional measures were reported by Member States in relation to the following 
directives:   

  Framework  Directive  (Directive  89/391/EEC3).  Many  Member  States  reported 
more  stringent  and/or  additional  measures  in  the  context  of  the  Framework 
Directive during the 2013-2017 reporting period. For example, Belgium amended 
the  Well-being  Act  to  further  regulate    occupational  psychosocial  risks;  France 
adopted  new  provisions  related  to  sexual  and  moral  harassment  and  associated 
employers’ responsibility, as well as to prevention of occupational risks; Hungary 
set out additional measures on training, while Finland put in place extra measures 
on harassment at work and shared workplaces and for workers working alone. In 
Latvia, Slovakia and Slovenia, the legislation transposing this directive applies to 
a self-employed person and in Romania, the scope of the directive was extended 
to students. 

  Directive  89/654/EEC  on  Workplaces55.  Austria,  Belgium,  Croatia,  Cyprus, 
Denmark,  Estonia,  France,  Hungary,  Latvia,  Portugal,  Romania,  Slovakia  and 
Slovenia adopted additional measures to ensure a higher level of health and safety 
in  workplaces 
administrative 
cases, 
burden/administrative procedures. 

reduce 

some 

and, 

the 

in 

to 

  Directive  92/57/EEC  on  Construction  Sites85.  The  national  implementation 
reports  of  Belgium,  Bulgaria,  Croatia,  Cyprus,  Czechia,  Denmark,  Estonia, 
Finland,  France,  Hungary,  Ireland,  Latvia,  Malta,  Poland,  Portugal,  Slovakia, 
Slovenia and Sweden identified more stringent and/or additional measures. Some 
examples are obligations of prior notification of works (Belgium), the regulation 
of  the  use  of  personal  protective  equipment  and  construction  with  prefabricated 
elements  (Finland)  and  the  qualifications  for  health  and  safety  coordinators 
preparing the design and implementing the project (Cyprus).   

54 

 
 
The national  implementation  reports also  identified  areas with  major implementation 
difficulties.  Several  problems  were  reported  in  the  implementation  of  the  OSH 
directives, in particular in relation to Directive 98/24/EC on Chemical Agents at Work59 
or  Directive  1999/92/EC  on  Explosive  Atmospheres61.  Concerns  chiefly  reflected  the 
complexity of these directives. 

Concerning  the  implementation  of  the  Chemical  Agents  Directive59,  some  of  the 
difficulties reported relate to financial questions inherent to the monitoring of exposure to 
chemical  agents  (e.g.  Portugal,  Spain);  limited  or  insufficient  numbers  of  authorised 
laboratories  (Estonia,  Romania)  and  technical  difficulties  with  measurements  and  the 
effectiveness  of  protection  (France).  Several  Member  States  reported  challenges  in 
substituting  hazardous  chemical  agents  for  less  hazardous  ones  in  the  workplace  and 
many  national  implementation  reports  indicated  that  SMEs  faced  particularly  serious 
challenges  in  complying  with  EU  and  national  legislation  on  workers’  exposure  to 
chemical agents. These challenges often related to the lack of expertise and knowledge, 
lack of financial resources, lack of access to a dedicated OSH professional and potential 
overlaps  between  various  laws  applied  at  the  workplace  on  chemical  agents  (e.g.  OSH 
legislation and REACH Regulation15). 

In  relation  to  Directive  1999/92/EC  on  Explosive  Atmospheres61,  Member  States 
reported various challenges related to its implementation, such as the limited availability 
of specialists on dust (Lithuania) and the administrative burden associated, although the 
explosion  protection  document  was  merged  with  the  risk  assessment  of  the  working 
environment (Estonia, Finland). Croatia reported challenges related to the documentation 
on explosion protection. Estonia noted that the implementation guide was not translated 
into the relevant language. Both Austria and Spain reported issues linked to the interface 
with  Directive  94/9/EC  on  Equipment  and  Protective  Systems  intended  for  use  in 
Potentially  Explosive  Atmospheres87.  Several  Member  States  reported  that  SMEs  faced 
challenges in implementing the directive, mainly due to insufficient knowledge, time and 
resources.  

Member States also reported major challenges linked to the implementation of Directive 
92/57/EEC on Construction Sites85, mainly due to the inherent complexity of the sector. 
Some of the difficulties relate to the definition of construction site (Italy, Lithuania), the 
particularities  of  small  construction  sites  (Portugal)  and  of  family  house  construction 
projects (Austria). 

Problems  were  also  reported  in  implementing  Directive  2002/44/EC  on  Vibration  at 
Work88 (mainly difficulties in assessing exposure as well as lack of experts in the field) 

87 Directive 94/9/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 23 March 1994 on the approximation 
of  the  laws  of  the  Member  States  concerning  equipment  and  protective  systems  intended  for  use  in 
potentially explosive atmospheres, OJ L 100, 19.4.1994, p. 1–29  
88 Directive 2002/44/EC  of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 June 2002 on the minimum 
health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risk arising from physical agents 

55 

 
                                                           
 
and Directive 2006/25/EC on Artificial Optical Radiation89 (such as challenges related to 
measurement and/or calculation and the specialised knowledge required).     

As  already  highlighted,  problems  related  to  the  practical  implementation  of  OSH 
directives  often  concerned  SMEs  and  related  to  the  lack  of  financial  resources  and 
limited  knowledge  of  the  rules,  as  well  as  the  complexity  of  those  rules.  This  was 
particularly the case for SMEs in less economically advantaged Member States.   

On  the  contrary,  Member  States  also  reported  areas  where  the  implementation 
problems  were  limited.  Very  few  problems  were  reported  in  areas  such  as  Directive 
91/383/EEC  on  Temporary  Work5.  The  main  source  of  difficulties  appeared  to  be  the 
insufficient  level  of  expertise  to  fully  use  available  practical  tools.  Improvements  were 
suggested in respect of the organisation of occupational healthcare and the conducting of 
health  inspections  (occupational  healthcare  expertise  was  often  not  used  in  temporary 
employment),  as  well  as  the  provision  of  information  and  training.  SMEs  in  most 
Member  States  did  not  appear  to  have  problems  with  the  application  of  these 
requirements.  

Directive 92/58/EEC on Safety and/or Health Signs at Work48, Directive 2003/10/EC on 
Noise  at  Work84  and  Directive  2004/40/EC  repealed  by  Directive  2013/35/EU  on 
Electromagnetic  Fields41  showed  few  difficulties.  The  same  was  true  of  Directive 
94/33/EEC on the protection of Young People at Work7.    

The national implementation reports highlighted areas where changes/updates could be 
needed.  Many  Member  States  stated  their  belief  that  Directive  89/654/EEC  on 
Workplaces55  should  be  reviewed,  considering  the  increasing  extent  of  employment 
relationships  with  flexible  working  conditions  (e.g.  teleworking,  platform  working),  as 
well as the rapid changes in the labour market, technological developments and a range 
of employment types to which traditional OSH requirements do not properly apply. Most 
Member States also pointed out that maintaining two annexes had become obsolete and 
was no longer necessary.   

Member  States  shared  the  view  that  Directive  90/270/EEC  on  Display  Screen 
Equipment56  also  needs  to  be  updated  to  take  into  account  recent  technological 
developments, although few more stringent and/or additional measures were adopted in 
this regard. 

Several  national  implementation  reports  suggested  that  the  annexes  to  Directive 
92/29/EEC  on  Medical  Treatment  on  Board  Vessels6  should  be  reviewed,  and  that  the 

(vibration) (sixteenth individual directive  within the  meaning of  Article 16(1) of  Directive 89/391/EEC), 
OJ L 177, 6.7.2002, p.13 
89 Directive 2006/25/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on the minimum 
health  and  safety  requirements  regarding  the  exposure  of  workers  to  risks  arising  from  physical  agents 
(artificial  optical  radiation)  (19th  individual  Directive  within  the  meaning  of  Article 16(1)  of  Directive 
89/391/EEC), OJ L 114, 27.4.2006, p.38 

56 

 
                                                                                                                                                                            
annexes  to  Directive  2000/54/EC  on  Biological  Agents49  should  be  adapted  to  recent 
technical developments and research in this area.  

4.4.  Conclusions  from  the  assessment  of  the  national  implementations 

reports 

As  described  earlier,  the  Commission  is  required  to  evaluate  every  five  years  the 
practical  implementation  of  the  OSH  legal  framework  in  Member  States.  The  first  ex-
post evaluation of the EU OSH Framework Directive and 23 related directives90 covered 
the period 2007 to 2012.  

The  second  national  practical  implementation  reports  covered  the  period  from  2013  to 
2017  included.  Compared  to  the  national  implementation  reports  for  the  period  2007-
2012,  which  was  the  basis  of  full-fledged  ex-post  evaluation  of  the  OSH  legal 
framework,  the  reports  for  2013-2017  provided  an  update  on  changes  implemented  by 
the  Member  States  since  2013.  This  analysis  on  how  Member  States  have 
transposed/implemented  the  different  OSH  directives  only  takes  into  account  progress 
made in this area following the ex-post evaluation and therefore no major elements have 
been reported. 

According to the national implementation reports, Member States do not seem to see the 
need at present for more legislation on safety and health at work. The EU OSH directives 
are  overall  seen  as  having  on  the  whole  worked  well  and  with  a  view  to  adapt  to 
technological  and  scientific  developments,  only  few  specific  directives  have  been 
identified as requiring updating. This is for instance, among others, the case of Directive 
90/270/EEC  on  Display  Screen  Equipment56)  and  Directive  89/654/EEC  on 
Workplaces55. Many Member States have reported the need to update both directives, in 
order to adapt them to technological changes and to the increasing extent of employment 
relationships with flexible working conditions. 

This is in line with the major future OSH challenges identified by most Member States in 
their national implementation reports. According to them, the main OSH challenges arise 
from  the  accelerating  development  of  technology,  particularly  by  robotics  and 
digitalisation,  which  will  bring  along  new  working  practices  and  employment 
arrangements,  a  progressive  fluidity  of  physical  workplaces  and  the  reinforcement  of 
teleworking.  New  approaches  to  occupational  risk  prevention  and  OSH  compliance 
control will be needed to address these challenges. 

90  Staff  Working  Document  “Ex-post  evaluation  of  the  European  Union  occupational  safety  and  health 
Directives  (REFIT  evaluation)”  SWD(2017)  9  accompanying  Communication  from  Commission  to  the 
European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  Regions 
“Safer and Healthier Work for All  -Modernisation of the EU Occupational Safety and Health Legislation 
and Policy” COM(2017)12 final. 

57 

 
 
 
                                                           
5.  CONCLUSIONS  

Both  the  stocktaking  exercise  of  the  achievements  in  the  implementation  of  the  EU 
strategic framework on health and safety at work 2014-20202 and the assessment of the 
national implementation reports (presented in chapter 3 and chapter 4 respectively) show 
the  high  level  of  implementation  of  the  previous  strategic  framework  and  the  2017 
Communication8.  The  strategic  framework  2014-2020  has  played  a  pivotal  role  in  the 
way that Member States and enterprises have defined OSH objectives and priorities, and 
has trigger a large number of actions, including the adoption or the update of legislation, 
that have contributed to the improvement of safety and health at work in the EU. 

There  is  consensus  among  the  stakeholders  on  the  importance  of  setting  at  EU  level 
common strategic objectives towards safer and healthier workplaces and on the relevance 
of a new EU OSH strategic framework for the period 2021-20271. Building on a tripartite 
approach,  the  new  strategic  framework  will  guide  investment  in  OSH,  and  ultimately 
improve the health of millions of workers in the EU.  

The development of the new EU OSH strategic framework came at the backdrop of an 
unprecedented global pandemic. The improvements on OSH are expected to contribute to 
the recovery, due to their positive impact on employment and the economy.  

The  results  of  the  stocktaking  exercise  together  with  the  extensive  feedback  and  input 
received from citizens and from administrations, associations and other organisations, as 
reflected  in  the  Staff  Working  Document  –  Stakeholder  consultation-Synopsis  report12, 
have contributed to the identification and design of the OSH challenges and priorities of 
the strategic framework 2021-2027. 

These EU OSH strategic priorities 2021-2027 are interlinked with  the Commission  key 
policies, including the green and digital agenda, the response to the pandemic, as well as 
Europe’s  Beating  Cancer  Plan.  It  takes  into  consideration  the  wide  range  of  social, 
economic and technological developments that the EU is currently facing. Demographic 
changes,  including  the  ageing  workforce  and  the  gender  perspective,  climate  change, 
globalisation, and now recently, the pandemic, are all aspects with a direct influence on 
safety and health at work. 

58 

 
 
 
Annex 1: List of Acronyms 

Abbreviation 
2017 Communication 

ACSH 
DG EMPL 

DG ENV 
DNEL 
ECHA 
ESAW 
ESENER 

EODS 
EU 
EU-OSHA 
EU strategic framework 

ICT 
ILO 
IRAT 
IT 
JRC 
MSEs 
OECD 

OEL 
OiRA 
OSH 
RAC 

REFIT evaluation 

SCOEL 

SLIC 
SMEs 
WHO 

Description 
Communication  on  the  modernisation  of  the  EU 
occupational safety and health legislation and policy 
Advisory Committee of Safety and Health at Work 
Directorate-General  for  Employment,  Social  Affairs 
and Inclusion 
Directorate-General for Environment 
Derived no-effect level 
European Chemicals Agency 
European Statistics on Accidents at Work 
European  Survey  of  Enterprises  on  New  and 
Emerging Risks 
European Occupational Diseases Statistics 
European Union 
European Agency for Safety & Health at Work 
EU strategic framework on health and safety at work 
2014-2020 
Information and communication technologies 
International Labour Organisation 
Interactive risk assessment tools 
Information Technology 
Joint Research Centre 
Micro and small enterprises 
Organisation 
Development 
Occupational Exposure Limit 
Online interactive risk assessment 
Occupational safety and health 
Committee  for  Risk  Assessment  of  the  European 
Chemicals Agency 
Ex-post 
occupational safety and health directives 
Scientific  Committee  on  Occupational  Exposure 
Limits 
Senior Labour Inspectors Committee 
Small and medium-sized enterprises 
World Health Organisation 

for  Economic  Cooperation 

the  European  Union 

evaluation  of 

and 

59 

 
 
 
Annex 2: List of Directives covered by the national practical 
implementation reports for the period from 2013 to 2017 
-  Directive  89/391/EEC91  of  12  June  1989  on  the  introduction  of  measures  to 

encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work; 

-  Council  Directive  89/654/EEC92  of  30  November  1989  concerning  the  minimum 
safety and health requirements for the workplace (first individual directive within the 
meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC); 

-  Directive  2009/104/EC93  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  16 
September 2009 concerning the minimum safety and health requirements for the use 
of  work  equipment  by  workers  at  work  (second  individual  Directive  within  the 
meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC;  

-  Council Directive 89/656/EEC94 of 30 November 1989 on the minimum health and 
safety requirements for the use by workers of personal protective equipment at the 
workplace  (third      individual  directive  within  the  meaning  of  Article  16(1)  of 
Directive 89/391/EEC);  

-  Council Directive 90/269/EEC95 of 29 May 1990 on the minimum health and safety 
requirements  for  the  manual  handling  of  loads  where  there  is  a  risk  particularly  of 
back injury to workers (fourth individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) 
of Directive 89/391/EEC); 

-  Council Directive 90/270/EEC96 of 29 May 1990 on the minimum safety and health 
requirements  for  work  with  display  screen  equipment  (fifth  individual  directive 
within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC);  

-  Directive 2004/37/EC97  of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 
2004 on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens 
or mutagens at work (sixth individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) 
of Directive 89/391/EEC;  

-  Directive  2000/54/EC98  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  18 
September  2000  on  the  protection  of  workers  from  risks  related  to  exposure  to 
biological agents at work (seventh individual directive within the meaning of Article 
16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC);  

91 OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p.1. 
92 OJ L 393, 30.12.1989, p.1. 
93 OJ L 260, 3.10.2009, p. 5. 
94 OJ L 393, 30.12.1989, p.18. 
95 OJ L 156, 21.6.1990, p.9. 
96 OJ L 156, 21.6.1990, p.14. 
97 OJ L 229, 29.6.2004, p.23. 
98 OJ L 262, 17.10.2000, p.21. 

60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
-  Council Directive 92/57/EEC99 of 24 June 1992 on the implementation of minimum 
safety  and  health  requirements  at  temporary  or  mobile  construction  sites  (eight 
individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC); 

-  Council Directive 92/58/EEC100 of 24 June 1992 on the minimum requirements for 
the provision of safety and/or health signs at work (ninth individual Directive within 
the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC); 

-  Council Directive 92/85/EEC101 of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of measures 
to encourage improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and 
workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding (tenth individual Directive 
within the meaning of Article 16 (1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) ; 

-  Council  Directive  92/91/EEC102  of  3  November  1992  concerning  the  minimum 
requirements  for  improving  the  safety  and  health  protection  of  workers  in  the 
mineral-extracting industries through drilling (eleventh individual directive within 
the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC ); 

-  Council Directive 92/104/EEC103 of 3 December 1992 on the minimum requirements 
for  improving  the  safety  and  health  protection  of  workers  in  surface  and 
underground mineral-extracting industries (twelfth individual directive within the 
meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC); 

-  Council  Directive  93/103/EC104  of  23  November  1993  concerning  the  minimum 
safety and health requirements for work on board fishing vessels (thirteenth individual 
directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC);  

-   Council  Directive  98/24/EC105  of  7  April  1998  on  the  protection  of  the  health  and 
safety  of  workers  from  the  risks  related  to  chemical  agents  at  work  (fourteenth 
individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC); 

-  Directive  1999/92/EC106  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  16 
December  1999  on  minimum  requirements  for  improving  the  safety  and  health 
protection  of  workers  potentially  at  risk  from  explosive  atmospheres  (fifteenth 
individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC); 

-  Directive  2002/44/EC107  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  25  June 
2002  on  the  minimum  health  and  safety  requirements  regarding  the  exposure  of 

99 OJ L 245, 26.8.1992, p.6. 
100 OJ L 245, 26.8.1992, p.23. 

101 OJ L 348, 28.11.1992, p. 1. 
102 OJ L 348, 28.11.1992, p.9. 
103 OJ L 404, 31.12.1992, p.10. 
104 OJ L 307, 13.12.1993, p.1. 
105 OJ L131, 5.5. 1998, p.11. 
106 OJ L 23, 28.1.2000, p.57. 
107 OJ L 177, 6.7.2002, p.13. 

61 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
workers  to  the  risk  arising  from  physical  agents  (vibration)  (sixteenth  individual 
directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC); 

-  Directive 2003/10/EC108 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 February 
2003  on  the  minimum  health  and  safety  requirements    regarding  the  exposure    of 
workers  to  the  risk  arising  from  physical  agents  (noise)  (seventeenth  individual 
directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC); 

-  Directive 2004/40/EC109 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 
2004  on  the  minimum  health  and  safety  requirements  regarding  the  exposure  of 
workers  to  the  risks  arising  from  physical  agents  (electromagnetic  fields)  (18th 
individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC);  

Repealed by: Directive 2013/35/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 
26 June 2013 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure 
of  workers  to  the  risks  arising  from  physical  agents  (electromagnetic  fields)  (20th 
individual  Directive  within  the  meaning  of  Article  16(1)  of  Directive  89/391/EEC) 
and repealing Directive 2004/40/EC; 

-  Directive  2006/25/EC110  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  5 April 
2006  on  the  minimum  health  and  safety  requirements  regarding  the  exposure  of 
workers  to  risks  arising  from  physical  agents  (artificial  optical  radiation)  (19th 
individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC); 
-  Council  Directive  91/383/EEC111  of  25  June  1991  supplementing  the  measures  to 
encourage  improvements  in  the  safety  and  health  at  work  of  workers  with  a  fixed-
duration employment relationship or a temporary employment relationship; 
-  Council Directive 92/29/EEC112 of 31 March 1992 on the minimum safety and health 

requirements for improved medical treatment on board vessels; 

-  Council Directive 94/33/EC113 of 22 June 1994 on the protection of young people at 

work; 

-  Directive  2009/148/EC114  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  30 
November  2009  on  the  protection  of  workers  from  the  risks  related  to  exposure  to 
asbestos at work. 

108 OJ L 42, 15.2.2003, p.38. 
109 OJ L 184, 24.5.2004, p.1. 
110 OJ L 114, 27.4.2006, p.38. 
111 OJ L 206, 29.7.1991, p. 19. 
112 OJ L 113, 30.4.1992, p.19. 
113 OJ L 216, 20.8.1994, p. 12. 
114 OJ L 330, 16.12.2009, p. 28. 

62