The world(s) of work in transition ETUI-ETUC conference

ETUI jobs

Pascal Etienne, secretary general of the Federation of the European Ergonomics Societies (FEES) attended for a part the three days conference organized at the end of June by the European trade unions (E

ETUI jobs

Pascal Etienne, secretary general of the Federation of the European Ergonomics Societies (FEES) attended for a part the three days conference organized at the end of June by the European trade unions (ETUI and ETUC) in Brussels on the issue the world(s) of work in transition.

During the plenary sessions a lot of prominent speakers representing European and global institutions, such as Ministers from Greece or Bulgaria, EU Commissioners, EU MPs, Trade Union Secretaries from the International Trade Union Confederation or the European Trade Union Confederation, the International Labour Organization and academics depicted the future of the EU in a globalized world and the main trends of the future of work. The speeches were coined by the present difficulties in the building of a European frame and its consequences on the work and the labour relations.

The current economic growth model based on constantly rising GDP and an environmental dead end was questioned. In his presentation, for example, the former Director of the World Trade Organization and EU official, Pascal Lamy, stressed that we tend to a “European globalization” in which the European social model (with namely less inequality, social rights and human rights) is part of a “European brand”. The challenge is now to face the greening and the digitalization of the economy. But the session showed as well strong debates on such proposals, some panelists discussing the statement of a European model present in all the EU countries.

In another panel on the issue “a new economic approach: how to fix the shortcomings of the current economic model?” Enrico Giovannini, professor at the Rome University, presented the results of his findings with the necessity to consider the workers as an asset and not a cost, which implies to change the accountability rules. He mentioned as well as resources the results of the ESPAS (European Strategy and Policy Analysis System) conference held in Brussels in November 2017.

FEES remarked two interesting workshops

The role of worker’s participation in addressing the digitalization driven Europeanisation strategies of Multinational Companies (MNCs)

In the workshop, European employers, experts and Works Council representatives presented how MNCs currently shape and have been shaped by the two trends of digitalization and globalization, following a two-step strategy of both stretching and bundling up. “Stretching” refers to company strategies to grow bigger, more digital, and more international through expansion, mergers, and acquisitions, both within and across industries, a process powered by an accelerated implementation of information and communication technology. The subsequent ‘bundling up’ processes manifest themselves in various trends of cross-border standardization and centralization. Both of these processes result in a profound shift in the arenas for workers participation. In an interactive process framed by the results of an overview study about the key trends shaping MNCs strategies, the workshop participants have shared the specific perspectives on these challenges from the point of view of industry, companies and trade unions.

Workshop on the impact of automation on working conditions, health and safety

In this workshop, trade unionist and experts explained how technological developments could be great opportunities to improve the design of safe and healthy working places. Automation impacts both social and economic patterns and makes it necessary to explore the interface between people, machines and processes from a wide range of perspectives. How to deal with the high demands on workers in terms of cognitive abilities, complex decision-making mechanisms, unfamiliarity with (hidden) events and the ramifications of a lack of situational-awareness potentially associated with automation. The very concrete presentations of the panel aimed to understand the territory where designers, employers and workers can look at automation by sharing the respective requirements, concerns and limitations in an attempt to formulate recommendations to promote successful coexistence of automation and workers safety and health. In the debate, the opportunities presented by the implementation of the EU machines directive requirements articulated with the risk assessment requirements of the “OHS framework” directive as a design and feedback process were stressed.

More information on the conference is available on the conference webpage: https://www.etui.org/Events/ETUC-ETUI-conference-The-World-s-of-Work-in-Transition

Jobs take their toll

European Trade Union Institute, etui.
The European Trade Union Institute organised a conference with strong ergonomics interest.

 

The EU debate on upping the retirement age is meaningful only if it includes working condi

European Trade Union Institute, etui.
The European Trade Union Institute organised a conference with strong ergonomics interest.

 

The EU debate on upping the retirement age is meaningful only if it includes working conditions, particularly unequal exposure to hazardous substances and the gender impact on the quality of working life. This is not just something for politicians and the establishment – it affects all workers. 
Researchers, public officials, trade unionists and other social stakeholders explored these critical issues at a two-day conference on 10 and 11 December 2013 in Brussels. The conference looked in particular to three areas where the hardships of work are a big issue: building, motor manufacturing and shopwork.

SELF press release on arduousness at work

The French Language Ergonomics Society (SELF) welcomes that the Act dated 9th November 2010, regarding pensions reform, arduousness at work is now recognized by the French Labour Code and, therefore, employers are required to ensure its prevention.

The French Language Ergonomics Society (SELF) welcomes that the Act dated 9th November 2010, regarding pensions reform, arduousness at work is now recognized by the French Labour Code and, therefore, employers are required to ensure its prevention.
This new Act is a real opportunity to strengthen or even broaden the scope for the improvement of conditions for work performance by taking into account this reality, which has often been identified and analysed in ergonomics, in order to help reduce it more efficiently.

However, SELF is concerned by the orientations brought about in the definition to which arduousness 
has been attributed in the Act and by the conditions for its prevention included in the decrees that 
followed its publication. Having been considered in a very restrictive way, these orientations can lead 
to the weakening of prevention models and practices and, more specifically, of those adopting the 
ergonomics approach which places the actual work activity at the centre of its preoccupations.
Emerging in the context of pensions reform, arduousness at work first appears within the Social 
Security Code with compensation as the objective point, allowing employees who would have
performed strenuous work during their career to retire early. Such departure due to strenuousness is 
granted to workers with permanent disability rate (PD) of higher than or equal to 20%. For PDs below 
10% no compensation is envisaged. For PD rates of between 10% and 20%, this right is open to those 
workers who would have been exposed to certain types of occupational risk factors for a period of 17 
years and, if their disability is related to the exposure in question. In order to determine the level of 
such exposure, the Act provides for the employer to ensure the monitoring of workers “exposed to one 
or more occupational risk factors determined by the decree and linked to dramatic physical constraints,
an aggressive physical environment or some work routines which may leave lasting, identifiable and 
irreversible traces on their health” (CT-L4121 3-1). This latter statement is now systematically
repeated, in a number of publications, to define arduousness at work. It tends, in fact, to direct the 
analysis of arduous situations toward the identification of ten risk factors, which have since been 
specified by the decree, (1) and to act, in terms of prevention, on these factors. Yet, as seen above, this 
definition is determined by compensation terms and not by prevention issues.
SELF warns about an approach on arduousness at work which, by directing action towards these risk 
factors alone, is designed to prevent only those PD risks ranging between 10 and 20%, thereby 
excluding any other form of damage to health, either by its nature or severity, related to the exercise of 
strenuous activities. This would, in effect, imply addressing the risk for early retirement and not the 
risk of harm to health. It would mean a serious drifting away from the right interpretation of the text.
The apparent lack of reference to the “psycho-social” dimension of the arduousness of working 
conditions in this Act may also lead to a drift in the interpretation of the text. Indeed, this shortcoming
is, once again, applicable only to conditions for early retirement provided for in the case of PD rates of 
between 10 and 20%. Yet, in the case of disability rates of over 20%, a wide range of diseases or 
injuries resulting from work related accidents could be eligible for an early retirement on arduousness 
grounds, including “psychiatric injury (2)” (cognitive impairment , anxiety disorders, depression, etc..). 
In other words, though psycho-social risks are not taken into consideration in exposure records, they 
are, nonetheless, likely to cause lasting, identifiable and irreversible traces on worker’s health which,
accordingly, would rate them similar to arduousness.
Finally, by assigning a direct causal relationship between exposure to certain factors of arduousness 
and the onset of long-term effects on health, the Act tends to exclude any reference to the actual work 
activity. Yet, arduousness of work cannot be understood without reference to work activity which it 
affects. In ignoring this dimension, the Act could encourage expert analysis which is strictly technical 
and normative or even legal, regarding factors of stress and associated thresholds. This approach can 
be justified within the scope of negotiated compensation, but is highly restrictive in the field of 
prevention.
In this context of reinforcing the legislation regarding the arduousness of work, which tends to 
increasingly identify and recognize occupational hazards rather than anticipating them in order to 
better protect the health of workers, SELF reaffirms the need to act upon work and its organization.