Chapter II. The working environment (air pollution, noise and vibration)

A. Scope of the instruments

248. As do the instruments on the guarding of machinery, Convention No. 148 and Recommendation No. 156 have a very wide scope defined in a comprehensive manner. The law and practice report prepared by the Office noted that:

... the improvement of the working environment, which is the final aim of the efforts undertaken, has often been considered in a fragmentary way in all but a few legislations. This is particularly obvious in the measures taken against noise and vibration: in respect of noise only certain types of work or certain assignments are covered; in respect of vibration provisions are still few and limited in scope. It seems reasonable, then, as a first step, to encourage a comprehensive approach to the problems, so that the general principles of prevention and protection in the field of atmospheric pollution, noise and vibration may be properly stated and find their place in all legislation adopted as a basis for the issuing of regulations. (Endnote 1)

249. In answering the Office questionnaire preliminary to the Conference's first discussion of the proposed instruments, the great majority of governments recognised that the health of workers must be protected in the same way regardless of where they are employed and that the instruments should be applicable to all activities involving exposure to the hazards under consideration.

250. Convention No. 148 and Recommendation No. 156, to balance their comprehensive coverage, also provide for flexibility on two essential points: the exceptions permitted in respect of branches of economic activity covered; and the possibility of accepting obligations under the instruments separately in respect of some risks only. One other point which will be covered in this section of the survey concerns the definition of occupational risks given in the Convention.

I. Application to all branches of economic activity and possible exclusions

251. Article 1, paragraph 1, of Convention No. 148 makes it applicable "to all branches of economic activity". Under Paragraph 1(1) of Recommendation No. 156, the two instruments should be applied to all branches of economic activity "to the greatest extent possible".

252. While establishing the principle of general application, Convention No. 148 nevertheless provides in paragraph 2 of Article 1 for possible exclusion from its scope of "particular branches of economic activity in respect of which special problems of a substantial nature arise". The term "branches", according to the competent Conference Committee, "could permit the exclusion either of certain particular branches requiring particular rules, or of certain technical processes according to the level of technical development, or of certain categories of persons such as self-employed workers in certain sectors". (Endnote 2) Such exclusions may be made by a ratifying government after consultation with the representative organisations of employers and workers concerned, where such exist. According to paragraph 3 of the same Article, the branches excluded should be listed in the first report on the application of the Convention submitted under article 22 of the ILO Constitution, with an explanation of the reasons for their exclusion. In its subsequent reports a ratifying government undertakes to indicate the position of its law and practice in respect of the excluded branches and the extent to which effect has been given or is proposed to be given to the Convention in respect of them.

253. The branches of activity or categories of workers which were most often cited as causing special problems were seafarers and self-employed persons. Attempts were made to include express exceptions in the Convention in their respect but they were not followed by the Conference. As concerns self-employed persons, Paragraph 1(2) of Recommendation No. 156 suggests that measures be taken to give them protection analogous to that provided for employed workers.

254. Once the Convention had entered into force, one government requested the Office's opinion as to whether the Convention applies to the public service in virtue of its coverage of "all branches of economic activity", particularly with respect to state or local administrations which have no commercial activity, and to institutions such as railway and postal services which are administered by the government and are not conducted with a view to profit. In the Memorandum prepared by the International Labour Office in answer to that request it was pointed out in the first place that "what is decisive in determining whether a particular activity is a branch of economic activity is whether the persons engaged in it form part of the economically active population, not whether the institutions or undertakings concerned are operated for commercial or profit-making purposes". Taking into account the preparatory work on Convention No. 148, and on the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), the scope of which was defined in similar terms, the Office concluded that "the term "all branches of economic activity" is a comprehensive expression covering all fields in which members of the economically active population are gainfully employed in the public as well as in the private sector". (Endnote 3)

255. A study of the national legislation on occupational safety and health shows that it is still a branch of labour law which is characterised by numerous exclusions and exceptions. This is considered by many countries to be inevitable due to their level of economic development, technical circumstances or other reasons. There is also discernible, however, a tendency towards its progressive extention to provide protection for all workers in all branches of economic activity, in the spirit of the instruments on the working environment.

256. The analysis of the reports of the ratifying countries on Convention No. 148 shows that only very limited use has so far been made of the possibility of excluding particular branches of economic activity or categories of workers. Thus, one country stated that the fishing industry was excluded from the application of the Convention after consultations with employers' and workers' organisations. (Endnote 4) Another country made exclusion in respect of maritime sector. (Endnote 5) However, an analysis of the scope of the principal laws on occupational safety and health in member States suggests that the possibility of excluding certain branches of economic activity provided by the Convention, could be more widely used in the future by States wishing to ratify the Convention. Moreover, the definitions of workplaces and workers covered by this legislation vary considerably in the degree of precision and detail, both between different countries and between different laws within them. The tendencies observed here are the same that were noted above in respect of the instruments on the guarding of machinery. The most common exclusions concern self-employed persons, public service employees, military service, work in family undertakings, homework and domestic service.

257. Exclusions also affect whole branches of economic activity such as agriculture, mining, shipping, fishing, air transport, railways, posts and telecommunications. In Italy, for example, the National Health Service Act of 1978 applies to all occupational sectors except state railways, posts and telecommunications, public transport by land, ships and aircraft. (Endnote 6) In many countries the activities excepted from the principal laws on occupational safety and health are covered by separate laws. In some countries the legislation does not apply to undertakings employing less than a specified number of workers. In a number of countries the legislation is based on the concept of "premises", which is now giving way to a more comprehensive concept of "employment" in general. Thus, the earlier approach of having separate laws applicable to certain sectors is being replaced in an increasing number of countries by legislation of a general scope covering a wide range of employment types and situations. In the United States, for example, the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 applies "with respect to employment performed in a workplace". (Endnote 7) The tendency of making the application of general safety and health provisions as broad as possible, is reflected in the legislation of a number of both developed and developing countries. (Endnote 8) Because of the broad scope of legislation on the working environment, its implementation by stages is provided for in some countries. In the Netherlands, for example, the implementation of the Working Environment Act of 1980 will be phased over an 8-year period which began in 1983. In the first phase of implementation, major sections of the Act were applied to workers in private undertakings only, while in the second phase they will be applied to public employees as well.

258. Finally, it should be noted that in some countries, as for example in the socialist countries with centrally planned economies, the occupational safety and health legislation contains no exceptions to its coverage, and applies to the whole of the national economy. (Endnote 9)

II. Acceptance of obligations for some risks only

259. Article 2, paragraph 1, of Convention No. 148 allows acceptance of its obligations separately in respect of air pollution, noise and vibration, subject to consultation with the representative organisations of employers and workers, where such exist.

260. According to paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 2 non-acceptance of obligations in respect of a given hazard should be specified when ratifying the Convention; the government's first report should give reasons for such non-acceptance; and in subsequent reports the government should state the position of its law and practice as well as measures envisaged in respect of the category or categories of hazards excluded; lastly, the government may notify later its acceptance of the obligations of the Convention in respect of a category or categories previously excluded.

261. The possibility of excluding certain categories of hazards on ratification is an important element of flexibility provided by the Convention. It permits implementation of its provisions by stages and enables the countries concerned to ratify the Convention when they are satisfied that their legislation and practice give effect to its provisions in respect of at least one category of hazards. Having done so these countries will undoubtedly gain valuable experience in the application of the Convention which will help them to extend their legislation to cover other hazards and to accept the corresponding obligations under the Convention.

262. Of the 18 countries which had ratified Convention No. 148, only three have limited their acceptance of its obligations to certain risks only: two in respect of air pollution only, (Endnote 10) and one in respect of air pollution and noise only. (Endnote 11) All three opted for the exclusion of vibration but for quite different reasons. The Government of the United Kingdom considered it "premature to prepare the legislation necessary to meet the requirements of the Convention until the knowledge of the risks involved and precautions required is sufficiently developed". Commenting on this position, the Trades Union Congress (TUC) stated that more protective measures should be implemented on the basis of the available research, which it considered adequate to prepare some appropriate form of legislation. Taking note of these views, the Committee asked the Government to continue to inform it, in the light of the comments made by the TUC, of any progress made in this respect, as required in Article 2, paragraph 2, of the Convention. (Endnote 12) The Government of Spain, on the other hand, explained its non-acceptance of the obligations of the Convention in respect of vibration primarily by the difficulties in establishing technical criteria for monitoring this risk. At the same time it decided to modify and update the chapter on noise and vibrations of the General Ordinance on Safety and Health at Work taking account of the relevant provisions of the Convention. The Committee in that case requested the Government to indicate the progress made "with a view to declaring the Convention applicable to vibrations as well". (Endnote 13) The United Kingdom also did not accept obligations under the Convention in respect of noise, indicating in its first report that "existing legislation and practice on noise, particularly with respect to specifying exposure limits and the application of protective measures is insufficient at present to enable the Government either to ratify the Convention or to accept the Recommendation". In its subsequent reports the Government has indicated substantial developments referring in particular to the adoption of the Code of Practice for Reducing the Exposure of Employed Persons to Noise, as well as to the action of the European Community which resulted in the adoption in 1986 of the EEC Directive on the Protection of Workers from the Risks Related to Exposure to Noise at Work (86/188/EEC). (Endnote 14) Taking these developments into account, the Committee of Experts has requested the Government to indicate "whether the adoption of the EEC Directive on noise will permit the Government to reconsider the situation with a view to a possible acceptance by the United Kingdom of obligations under this Convention in respect of noise". (Endnote 15)

263. The Government of the United Republic of Tanzania did not indicate any reasons for not accepting its obligations in respect of noise and vibration, stating simply in its first report its intention to safeguard workers against air pollution, noise and vibration by enacting various rules and regulations to that effect.

264. Giving these three examples of the use of flexibility provided by the Convention as to the coverage of risks, the Committee would stress that the arrangements for the progressive application of the Convention may prove valuable both for developed and developing countries and can respond, if need be, to rapid changes taking place in the development of the safety and health legislation of the countries concerned.

III. Definition of risks covered

265. Article 3 of Convention No. 148 defines the risks which it covers in respect of air pollution, noise and vibration. These definitions were elaborated by a working party of the competent Conference Committee which included in its report the following explanations:

... the term "substances" should cover both inorganic and organic substances, including living matter. The words "whatever their physical state" indicated that they could be gas, vapour, aerosols and dust fibres as well as fungi, bacteria, virus, and so on. As far as the term "noise" was concerned, the working party felt that the complete range of frequencies should be included, i.e. not only the audible portion of the spectrum but also the ultrasonic and infrasonic portions. However, priority for purposes of protection was to be given to hazards arising from the audible portion and particularly to loss of hearing. The words "otherwise dangerous" had been retained in each case to take account of accidents caused by audible warning signals or other useful sounds in the working environment being masked. (Endnote 16)

266. It may be observed from the above explanations that the definitions given in the Convention are very broad and cover virtually every aspect of air pollution, noise and vibration which may be harmful to health or present other dangers for workers. Their purpose is mainly to provide guidance for countries in the application of the instruments on the working environment with a view to ensuring that all dangerous factors due to air pollution, noise and vibration, including new ones, should be duly considered for the elaboration of measures aimed at prevention, control and protection.

267. From the analysis of the legislation of both ratifying and non-ratifying countries, it may be concluded that where provisions concerning air pollution, noise and vibration are included in general laws or regulations they usually refer to these hazards in the same broad sense as does the Convention.

B. General measures for protection of the working environment

268. Convention No. 148 and Recommendation No. 156 contain a number of general provisions which concern essentially questions of responsibilities in the matter of regulation and application of measures for the prevention of occupational risks covered. The subjects dealt with in three subsections of this section of the survey will include respectively (a) provisions in national laws or regulations on occupational hazards in the working environment, (b) general responsibilities of employers and workers, and (c) the question of the relationship between the protection of the working environment and the protection of the general environment.

I. Basic legislation dealing with air pollution, noise and vibration

269. Article 4 of the Convention lays down a general framework for the regulation of matters concerning occupational hazards in the working environment. The legal aspects of defining the framework of the working environment are dealt with in paragraph 1 of this Article, while subsidiary technical aspects are covered by paragraph 2. The practical implementation of the general measures prescribed in laws or regulations will be dealt with in the next section of the survey.

270. Paragraph 1 of this Article stipulates: "National laws or regulations shall prescribe that measures be taken for the prevention and control of, and protection against, occupational hazards in the working environment due to air pollution, noise and vibration."

271. A study of the laws and regulations of the reporting countries prescribing standards applicable to the working environment, reveals the existence of three categories of provisions. The first comprises general standards of a comprehensive nature intended to ensure at least a minimum degree of protection from the hazards generally present in the working environment, without dealing with specific hazards. These laws and regulations concerning basic safety and health principles, which vary widely in their degree of detail, often form part of the Labour Code or constitute a separate text specifically concerned with occupational safety and hygiene. In many countries both types of legislation are present, the provisions of labour codes being further developed in special safety and health laws of general application.

272. The second category of provisions consists of laws and regulations applicable to particular branches of economic activity and laying down special safety and health standards for the whole of the branch concerned. Such laws and regulations most often exist for agriculture, mining, construction, sea and air transport and dock work. In many cases these branches are excluded from the scope of the labour codes and general laws and regulations on occupational safety and health mentioned above.

273. The third category of provisions comprises a variety of specific regulations dealing with particular hazards in the working environment, such as ionising radiations, carcinogenic substances, etc., or with particular types of hazardous work, such as, for example, work in pressurised chambers.

274. All these three categories of provisions prescribe to a varying degree measures for the prevention and control of, and protection against, air pollution, noise and vibration. Moreover, they are generally supplemented by a body of subsidiary regulations, technical standards, codes of practice, guides and so on, which lay down detailed rules, criteria and exposure limits for air pollution, noise and vibration, including those relating to given work situations. It is through this body of subsidiary technical standards that the Convention provides in Article 4, paragraph 2 for the practical implementation of measures of protection and prevention against air pollution, noise and vibration.

275. The complexity of the existing body of the safety and health legislation shows that the various aspects of the working environment are difficult to separate in practice, and that all the problems involved should be borne in mind when dealing with particular aspects of the working environment, whether air pollution, noise, vibration or other hazards.

276. The first thing that becomes evident from the Committee's examination of the national legislation concerning the working environment, is the extreme differences in the levels of development of this legislation between countries, which is closely linked to the overall level of economic development of the country. On the one extreme, there are some developed countries where the occupational safety and health legislation has become a separate branch of labour law embracing all three of the above-mentioned categories of legal provisions and technical standards. On the other, there is a considerable number of developing countries which still have virtually no legislation on the protection of the working environment of the kind provided for by the Convention and Recommendation. (Endnote 17) The reports of some of these countries simply stated that there are no legislative, administrative or other provisions in regard to any of the matters dealt with in the instruments (Endnote 18) although several others stressed that the relevant legislation is being prepared. (Endnote 19) The reports of a still greater number of developing countries referred only to a few basic provisions concerning occupational safety and health included in their labour codes or in a separate piece of legislation, such as general regulations on occupational safety and health. (Endnote 20) The reports of some of these countries acknowledged that the existing provisions are fragmentary and meet the requirements of the instruments on the working environment only in a few respects. (Endnote 21) One government stated in this respect that "no modification has been made to the present national laws since the Convention is touching new ground not previously covered by the national laws." (Endnote 22) A few countries stated that they ratified Convention No. 148 with the intention of adopting at a later stage national legislation giving effect to its provisions. (Endnote 23)

277. In many cases the general provisions included in labour codes of these countries constitute an enabling legislation, providing that safety measures in general or for particular hazards will be prescribed by regulations. (Endnote 24) In other countries it is the general regulations on occupational safety and health which enable the Minister to take decisions with respect to protective measures against particular hazards in the working environment. (Endnote 25)

278. Where such general regulations are adopted they are usually basic texts containing provisions on protection against occupational hazards. (Endnote 26)

279. In the majority of the developing countries for which information is available, the existing provisions are limited to laying down basic protective measures against air pollution, prescribing in particular adequate ventilation of working premises and evacuation of dust, gases, fumes and other noxious impurities. (Endnote 27)

280. There are still no provisions in the legislation of many of these countries specifically identifying such hazards in the working environment as noise and vibration, much less prescribing any protective measures in their respect. In that context the Government of Mali stated in its report that such measures should be studied with a view to possible inclusion in the Labour Code.

281. It should be noted, however, that in some countries of a comparable level of economic development the basic provisions have been supplemented by regulations dealing to some extent with all three categories of risks covered by the Convention and Recommendation. (Endnote 28) According to the report of Suriname, for example, nine safety regulations were adopted in 1981 under the Safety Act of 1947 including regulations containing relatively detailed safety provisions with respect to, inter alia, climate, air ventilation, noise and vibration. (Endnote 29)

282. An important trend in the development of the legislation on the working environment in a number of countries, is that more detailed principles and measures for workers' protection are incorporated in the specific legislation applicable to those branches of economic activity which are particularly hazardous. Thus, a number of governments pointed in their reports to the legislation concerning safety in mines, which ensures a higher level of protection for workers against air pollution, and to a lesser extent noise and vibration, than it is yet possible to extend to the whole of the national workforce. (Endnote 30)

283. In Greece, for example, the Regulation on Works in Mines and Quarries of 1984 introduced for the first time in this sector particular measures of protection and exposure limits to noise, airborne dust, gas, vapour and smoke which still are not prescribed for other branches of economic activity. (Endnote 31)

284. In other countries some protective measures prescribed by the Convention and Recommendation are laid down in general for undertakings classified as dangerous. This is the case, for example, in Luxembourg, where measures against air pollution and noise are prescribed through the legislation respecting establishments classified as dangerous, unhealthy and offensive. (Endnote 32)

285. In the great majority of countries, irrespective of their level of economic development, there are also specific, sometimes isolated pieces of legislation establishing protective and preventive measures in respect of certain particular hazards in the working environment due to air pollution, such as, for example, ionising radiations, benzene, lead, etc.

286. The general tendency observed by the Committee of Experts in the development of specific protective legislation applicable to particularly risky occupations, is that in many cases it appears to be at an experimental level, serving as a basis for later incorporation of its more advanced provisions in the safety legislation of a general scope.

287. An interesting trend in occupational safety and health legislation is that, while its contents become more and more diversified and technical, it has also recently tended towards consolidation and generalisation on the basis of certain fundamental principles of protection of the human being in the working environment. For instance, these fundamental principles have been included in the Constitutions of many States, especially those adopted or amended in recent years, as a general recognition of the basic right of each person to the protection of his health and welfare at work. (Endnote 33)

288. In the socialist countries, for example, the obligation of the State to secure the basic right of all working people to the protection of their health and labour is guaranteed in their Constitutions by such measures as provision of free health system, planned improvement of working conditions, elimination of all arduous labour, etc. (Endnote 34)

289. Moreover, the labour codes of some of these countries provide for special funds and material resources to be allocated on a planned basis by each undertaking for carrying out safety and health measures. The use of such funds is governed by collective agreements or industrial safety agreements concluded between the management of the undertaking and the trade union concerned. (Endnote 35)

290. In some countries which have well-developed legislation on occupational safety and health the labour codes or similar Acts are the principal legal instruments prescribing general measures against air pollution, noise and vibration in the working environment. For example, in the Ukrainian SSR, the Labour Code expressly obliges the management of the undertakings, among others, "to decrease and eliminate air pollution in industrial premises due to dust and gases, to limit the intensity of noise, vibrations, radiation, etc.". (Endnote 36) In France the Labour Code regulates in detail questions regarding protection against dangerous substances, air pollution by other impurities and noise. (Endnote 37)

291. The Consolidation of Labour Laws of Brazil, while laying down general safety measures and special measures for some unhealthy and dangerous activities, provides also for additional special measures to be prescribed in supplementary legislation for "the protection of employees who are exposed to harmful chemical substances, ionising and other radiation, noise, vibration and actions or effects on the human body, compulsory medical examinations, abnormal jolting or pressure at the workplace; an indication shall be given of suitable means of eliminating or reducing these effects, the maximum periods of exposure to them and the maximum limits for their age limits, the permanent supervision of workplaces and such other requirements as may be necessary". (Endnote 38)

292. As is shown by these examples, in many countries the kind of measures referred by Article 4 of Convention No. 148 for the prevention of and protection against air pollution, noise and vibration are prescribed to a varying degree of detail already in the labour codes while mere technical aspects are referred to the subsidiary legislation provided for in these codes. (Endnote 39) This is the traditional approach taken by national legislatures.

293. In an increasing number of countries, though, the rights and guarantees of workers to a safe and healthy working environment, the corresponding responsibilities of the employers, and the role of the State are further defined in separate basic Acts on occupational safety and health and the working environment. The development of this new kind of "umbrella" legislation of a comprehensive nature is a major development in safety and health legislation in the last two decades. Examples of this approach include the United States Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 and Japan's Industrial Safety and Health Act of 1972. Similar reforms were introduced in the 1970s in Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom and other European countries. More recently a new Act on Occupational Safety and Health was adopted in Greece in 1985. (Endnote 40) Such umbrella Acts on occupational safety and health have been adopted also in a number of Latin American countries. (Endnote 41) The reports of some countries indicate that such Acts will be adopted soon or are under consideration. (Endnote 42)

294. It was with the development of this kind of legislation that the concept of the safe working environment which is consecrated in the Convention and Recommendation, evolved and found expression in legal terms. The common features of this legislation consist in its general scope, its comprehensive approach to all factors in the working environment from the point of view of ensuring safety of workers, its enlarging of the concept of employers' responsibility to cover the establishment and maintenance of the quality of life for workers in the working environment. Such legislation also normally requires instituting procedures for close employer-worker collaboration on safety and health at different levels, provides for the responsibility of other persons concerned in relation to the protection of the working environment and, finally, rationalises existing administrative arrangements and responsibilities for the enforcement of this legislation.

295. The adoption of such basic Acts on the working environment has resulted also in a certain restructuring of the occupational safety and health legislation of the countries concerned, which consists of replacing gradually previous regulations on occupational safety adopted under general provisions of labour codes and other legislation, by new and more comprehensive regulations drawn up under these basic Acts. (Endnote 43) This transition may take various forms. In some cases the old legislation is completely repealed even before the new one has been adopted. (Endnote 44) In others, it remains in force during a transitional period for some categories of workers, (Endnote 45) and in still other cases the old legislation remains in force as regulatory provisions under the new basic Act on the working environment. (Endnote 46) Notwithstanding the apparent complexity of the structure of this revised occupational safety and health legislation in some countries, a new pattern emerges in which it is arranged in a coherent system of national regulations consisting of a basic Act on the working environment, which becomes the principal instrument implementing the Convention's and Recommendation's requirements. This is supplemented by general regulations prescribing its means of application, and by a set of special regulations covering more specific questions of protection. (Endnote 47)

296. There are some countries, however, where the structure of the legislation on occupational safety and health presents particular features. In Belgium virtually all the legislation on health and safety at work is contained in the General Regulations for the Protection of Labour (RGPT). (Endnote 48) The RGPT gathers together different laws, decrees and orders concerning similar subjects into sections, but there is no overall framework law on health and safety at work.

297. In other countries, there are a number of separate laws and subsidiary regulations containing provisions on health and safety at work. In Italy, while the principal legislation on occupational health and safety is Act No. 833 of 1978 on the National Health Service, most of the detailed protective provisions currently in force are contained in several decrees issued under Act No. 51 of 1955 which assigns the power to introduce health and safety regulations. (Endnote 49)

298. A particular group of laws found in many countries, and which should be mentioned separately, are those governing dangerous substances. These laws aim to control such substances not only in the working environment but also in the external environment. They therefore form a separate framework legislation with its own subsidiary regulations.

299. In all the countries where the occupational safety and health legislation has developed into a separate branch of labour law, the practical application of the preventive, control and protective measures laid down by the instruments in the working environment is ensured through an extensive body of subsidiary legislation which takes the form either of specific regulations or of technical standards and norms, which are usually adopted by the national standardisation institutions. In some countries both types of provisions are present, sometimes amounting to many dozens of instruments.

300. An important source of health and safety legislation concerned with preventive and protective measures against air pollution, noise and vibration is found in many countries, also in the social security and social insurance schemes and technical rules established under them. (Endnote 50) These rules may have the force of law, or may be enforced by means of financial sanctions (e.g. by increasing or decreasing contributions or by levying fines).

301. Finally, in many countries, non-statutory provisions are of varying importance in interpreting the practical application of the occupational safety and health legislation. These provisions, in the form of guide-lines (contained in circulars, notes, directions, instructions, etc.), are not directly enforceable in law, but are widely taken as indicators of the level of protection required to achieve compliance with the law on protection against air pollution, noise and vibration.

II. General responsibilities of employers and workers

302. Convention No. 148 establishes the general responsibility of employers and workers in respect of compliance with the prescribed measures against air pollution, noise and vibration. These general responsibilities are spelled out in more detail in various provisions of Recommendation No. 156, which will be dealt with later in the appropriate sections of the survey.

303. These provisions of the instruments on the working environment reflect a new concept found in modern legislation on occupational safety and health, according to which the law should establish a clear framework of basic statutory obligations which place responsibilities on employers and others in a clearly understandable manner. The obligations not only cover safeguards against physical risks; they concern the total working environment.

(a) Employers' responsibilities

304. Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention makes employers responsible for compliance with measures prescribed under the Convention.

305. The responsibility of employers to ensure compliance with measures for the prevention and control of, and protection against the hazards concerned is laid down in the relevant legislation of virtually all reporting countries where such legislation exists.

306. In the majority of countries the employer's responsibilities are defined in very broad terms in the basic texts, requiring them to ensure the overall safety and health of their employees at work and to comply with all measures prescribed for this purpose in the legislation. (Endnote 51)

307. In some countries the employer's obligation to adopt measures necessary for the health and safety of workers is recognised in the Constitution and is further reinforced in the relevant basic legislation. (Endnote 52)

308. In the socialist countries, the legal obligations of each undertaking and its management to ensure safe and healthy working conditions are reinforced by their obligations under the plans for social and economic development, which include special provisions for the promotion of occupational safety and health. The Labour Code of Bulgaria, for example, stipulates in section 274(1) that "the constant improvement of safe and healthy working conditions shall be carried out on the basis of the uniform plan for the social and economic development of the country and the means provided for in the plan for the implementation of the national programme to improve the safety and health aspects of working conditions". (Endnote 53)

309. In some other countries employers are required to draw up annual safety, health and welfare plans or a written statement of general policy in these matters, which must be made available to workers as well as to prepare an annual report on such activities during the previous year. (Endnote 54)

310. The provisions of the general legislation referring to employers' obligations in the field of occupational safety and health have been noted above in connection with similar requirements of the instruments on the guarding of machinery. As was pointed out there, while recognising the critical place of the employer in the working environment, the modern legislation places duties on everyone concerned with work activities, e.g. manufacturers, designers, suppliers, owners, people in control of premises, etc. As the risks inside the working environment may extend to the general environment, these duties are not only for the protection of the workers but also that of the general public.

311. It should be noted that in the majority of countries the law imposes on the employer a positive duty to ensure safety and health of employees at work, rather than the more limited duty of ensuring that their safety and health are not harmed. The employer usually bears this more limited duty towards members of the general public.

312. Employers' general obligations to protect their employees are expressed in a variety of ways. In the majority of countries, as was already mentioned, the law includes a general requirement for employers to protect the health and safety of their employees.

313. In the socialist countries, in Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and a number of other countries the law extends this protection to cover the welfare of workers.

314. In some countries the general responsibilities of the employer are defined in a less comprehensive manner. In Luxembourg, for example, the employer is required to observe the requirements of the relevant laws and insurance rules.

315. In Ireland there is no general obligation placed on employers to provide a healthy working environment. However, the implementation of specific legislation is largely the responsibility of employers, who are thus required, for example, to take all practicable measures to protect the persons employed against inhalation of dust, fumes or other impurities. (Endnote 55)

316. Substantial differences may be noted in the extent of care that must be taken by the employer. In Belgium, for example, the law requires employers to ensure "with the diligence of a good father" that all work takes place in suitable conditions from the point of view of the health and safety of workers. (Endnote 56) In the United Kingdom and a number of other countries having similar legislation, all reasonably practicable measures must be taken to ensure health, safety and welfare at work. (Endnote 57) In the Federal Republic of Germany employers must ensure that workers are afforded such protection against hazards to safety and health "as the nature of the undertaking permits". (Endnote 58) This is interpreted in subordinate legislation to mean that the undertaking should be ordered so as to meet commonly accepted up-to-date technical standards, observing the current state of knowledge of occupational medicine and of the study of labour methods and problems. In France the Labour Code requires establishments to be maintained in a state of cleanliness and hygiene necessary for the health of workers and to be managed in a way that guarantees their safety. (Endnote 59)

317. These provisions of the legislation referring to the general statutory obligations of the employer are usually further amplified and give concrete effect in the specific subordinate legislation dealing with particular aspects of the protection of the working environment. Thus, in countries where there are special regulations and technical standards on air pollution, noise and vibration they invariably define employers' responsibilities in a very detailed manner with respect to compliance with the safety measures prescribed. (Endnote 60)

318. Without giving an exhaustive picture it may be observed that in most of these countries the general matters on which the employers' duties and responsibilities in respect of safeguarding the working environment are focused include:

(i) safety in developing, planning and arrangement of workplace;

(ii) safety of the plant which includes machinery, equipment, appliances and other technical devices used or positioned in the workplace;

(iii) planning of the work and its arrangement to provide a suitable and safe system of work;

(iv) maintaining and monitoring a safe and healthy working environment using proper industrial hygiene techniques;

(v) adequate safety precautions and better housekeeping to prevent injuries from falls, slips and other comparable factors;

(vi) adequate precautions against fires, explosions and electric shock;

(vii) restricting and minimising the use of substances liable to cause ill-health and ensuring that conditions for maintaining safety and health exist at all times;

(viii) providing adequate health, hygiene, welfare, medical examinations and first-aid facilities;

(ix) providing and maintaining in proper condition the personal protective equipment and clothing;

(x) providing information, instruction, training and supervision in respect of safety and health matters;

(xi) co-operating with workers in promoting and developing measures to ensure safety and health, establishing safety committees in the undertaking, or providing for other arrangements.

319. While the content of employers' responsibilities becomes both broader and more detailed in scope, the same tendencies may be observed in the evolution of the corresponding responsibilities of the competent state authorities and of workers. The law in some countries generally indicates, as it does for example in Mexico, that "responsibility for safety and hygiene at work belongs as much to the authorities as to workers and employers, as specified in the legislation". (Endnote 61) Their respective responsibilities become more and more unified, requiring increasing close co-operation in ensuring the quality of the working environment.

320. Thus, in many countries employers now share with their employees the obligation to co-operate in promoting a concern for safety, health and welfare. (Endnote 62)

321. It may be interesting to note in this respect that in some countries employers are also obliged to ensure that workers comply with the provisions and instruments governing occupational safety and health. (Endnote 63) At the same time employers should ensure that workers who have duties arising from legal requirements are given the necessary powers and facilities. (Endnote 64)

322. In addition, in the majority of countries the employer is also under a duty not to levy on workers any charge in respect of anything done or provided in pursuance of any specific requirement of the relevant statutory provisions concerning safety and health at work.

(b) Collaboration of two or more employers at one workplace

323. As was pointed out in the law and practice report, the question of responsibilities "leads to others, one of which, though often ignored by national legislation, yet no less important, concerns the sharing of responsibility in the implementation of preventive measures where there are two or more employers at the same workplace. Owing to the modern tendency to subcontract, this situation is occurring more and more often, particularly in building, fitting-out and maintenance work". (Endnote 65) Convention No. 148 was the first international labour Convention to address this issue, introducing an important innovation in the field of international labour law. (Endnote 66) It may be pointed out that the issue was ripe for international regulation, as shown by the fact that 62 out of 69 countries replied in the affirmative on the question of the inclusion in the instrument of appropriate provisions on this subject. (Endnote 67)

324. Paragraph 2 of Article 6 of the Convention requires that "whenever two or more employers undertake activities simultaneously at one workplace, they shall have the duty to collaborate in order to comply with the prescribed measures, without prejudice to the responsibility of each employer for the health and safety of his employees. In appropriate circumstances, the competent authority shall prescribe general procedures for this collaboration". In the discussion of this provision in the competent Conference Committee a number of divergent views were expressed as to how the collaboration of several employers at one worksite should be ensured, the question essentially being whether the action of the competent authority in prescribing general procedures should consist of intervening systematically or only in appropriate circumstances. It was proposed, for example, that there should be a written agreement approved by the competent authority or, where such agreement could not be reached, that this authority should prescribe the procedure to be followed and allocate responsibility. These proposals were aimed at making the collaboration of employers in the implementation of preventive measures not merely voluntary but obligatory. On the other hand, a number of Government members of the Committee pointed to the administrative difficulty of supervising all such details on a large number of worksites and doubted whether the competent authority even had the right to impose such details. In some countries the law specified who had responsibility in certain cases, whereas in other cases employers were free to agree on sharing responsibility. (Endnote 68)

325. The views expressed in the Committee reflected the variety of national situations which called for a flexible approach in the Convention. The Convention thus provided for the intervention of the competent authority "in appropriate circumstances" where in its opinion prescription of the general procedures for collaboration of employers would be useful.

326. In a number of countries the problem of having two or more employers at one workplace is approached in the legislation from the point of view of defining their respective liabilities in respect of the safety and health of the workers concerned. This legislation often goes further and lays down principles of concurrent responsibilities of the owners or occupiers of the premises, employers, contractors and subcontractors, etc.

327. In Saudi Arabia, for example, it is provided that "in the event there are several partners or managers in any establishment, one of them, who is resident in the place of employment, shall be appointed to represent the employer and be responsible for any violation of the provisions of this code". The Labour Code also regulates mutual responsibilities of the concessionary companies and contractors in matters relating to occupational protection of their workers. (Endnote 69)

328. Nevertheless, only in a relatively small number of countries are employers placed under the duty to collaborate whenever two or more of them are working in the same place. In still fewer countries are there provisions encouraging collaboration by laying down procedures to follow, or by requiring employers themselves to adopt such procedures.

329. In all cases where the legislation has dealt with this question, the procedures focus on the selection from among employers sharing one worksite the one who will be responsible for co-ordinating measures for the prevention of accidents and risks to health and safety of all persons at the site. Other questions involved concern the extent of the responsibility of the "principal employer" vis-à-vis other employers at the same workplace, the duty of other employers to comply with the instructions given by the principal employer, the parallel co-operation of workers employed by different employers and, finally, the power of the competent authority to regulate all these questions especially when agreement among the parties concerned cannot be reached. On all these points considerable differences exist in the legislation of different countries on this subject.

330. In Denmark the law simply stipulates that "several employers who have work carried out at the same place of work and all persons employed at the same place of work shall co-operate to create safe and healthy working conditions for all employees"; the rules for such co-operation may be laid down by the Minister of Labour. (Endnote 70)

331. In the Netherlands, if two or more persons, not being employed, jointly perform work affected by regulations made under the Working Environment Act, they are considered to be both employers and employees for the purposes of the regulations, unless one is manifestly responsible for directing the work, in which case he is considered to be the employer. Such joint employers should co-operate to ensure compliance, and for types of activities to be designated in regulations they should set out in writing how this co-operation should be achieved. (Endnote 71)

332. In Norway a written agreement for the designation of the employer responsible for co-ordination is required at workplaces where more than ten employees are employed at the same time, and no one of the enterprises involved can be regarded as the main establishment. In the event that no such agreement is reached, the Labour Inspectorate shall be notified and shall decided which employer shall be responsible for co-ordination. (Endnote 72)

333. In Finland and Sweden the role of the competent authorities in establishing procedures for co-operation between several employers is not mentioned in the law, which simply gives them the right to agree together on the appointment of one of them as the person responsible for co-ordination (Sweden) or as a "joint labour protection supervisor" (Finland). (Endnote 73) In Sweden other employers and persons working at the workplace have the duty to comply with the instructions given by the responsible person. A special notice to this effect should be put up by him at any workplace common to several enterprises. (Endnote 74) In Finland there is an additional provision that workers engaged by such joint employers also have the right to elect "a joint labour protection representative to act on their behalf in co-operation ... with all the employers concerned and in relations with the labour protection authorities". (Endnote 75)

334. Particularly detailed provisions on the collaboration of several employers at one workplace exist in Japan in connection with construction work and work carried out by contractors. (Endnote 76) Where two or more contractors exist or two or more employers exist there will be a "master employer" out of the two or more employers and he must appoint an overall "controller" who shall have to direct and co-ordinate the work of different safety and health personnel of the contractor(s) or subcontractor(s). The responsibility is thus mainly on the employer who engages the principal contractor for the work which is partly or fully executed by the subcontractor(s). Also, when there are two employers in an establishment, the responsibility is borne by the one who engaged the first contractor. Measures for the application of these provisions are laid down in special orders.

335. In the socialist countries with centrally planned economies, the question of collaboration between several undertakings on the same worksite is regulated mostly through the establishment of unified plans for safety and health measures that are required for each such workplace. Their legislation contains detailed provisions with the aim of encouraging different forms of such co-operation in safety and health matters: exchange of experience, joint training, creation of common bodies and services, etc. (Endnote 77) All such measures may be initiated and supervised by the trade union committees of the undertakings brought together in one place, as well as by the local area authorities and trade union bodies. Basic provisions on this subject may also be found in the labour codes of some of these countries. In Poland, for example, according to the Labour Code "an establishment on whose premises work is carried out by other establishments shall enable the latter to organise the work in such a way as to ensure that their workers are afforded safe and healthy conditions of work". (Endnote 78)

336. In some countries, while there is no specific provision requiring the collaboration of several employers at the same workplace, the general duties of employers are formulated in such a way that they may imply such collaboration. In the United Kingdom, for example, employers and self-employed persons are under the duty to conduct their business in such a way that all persons, including those who are not their employees, are not exposed to risks to their health and safety. (Endnote 79) As the Government stated in its Article 22 Report on Convention No. 148, "the practical effect of this requirement is to ensure the need for collaboration of two or more employers undertaking activities simultaneously at the workplace, and it has not proved necessary or appropriate to prescribe further general procedures".

337. The Committee of Experts wishes to stress both the innovative character of these provisions of Convention No. 148, and the increasing number of work situations to which they apply. Such situations, moreover, most frequently arise in those industries such as shipbuilding, construction or chemical enterprises, which involve a particularly high level of occupational risk. Safety of the workers engaged by different employers but working side by side can be jeopardised in the absence of clearly defined responsibilities and co-operation between the employers and undertakings concerned. The Committee of Experts therefore hopes that the experience of some countries in dealing with such situations, illustrated briefly in this section of the survey, will prove helpful to the large majority of countries which have yet to provide in their legislation and practice for measures aimed at combining individual efforts of different employers at one workplace for the protection of all the workers concerned.

(c) Workers' responsibilities

338. Article 7, paragraph 1, of Convention No. 148 requires workers "to comply with safety procedures relating to the prevention and control of, and protection against, occupational hazards due to air pollution, noise and vibration in the working environment".

339. As in the case of the employers' obligations, workers' responsibilities are laid down in the basic labour legislation of the large majority of countries and provide in particular for the observance by them of safety and health measures prescribed in the legislation, as well as in specific rules and instructions adopted in the undertakings employing them. (Endnote 80)

340. With the development of occupational safety and health legislation which, as indicated repeatedly in this survey, increasingly tends to regulate all the aspects of the working environment in its entirety, and due to the increasing complexity of the working environment itself, the share of workers' responsibilities for ensuring their own safety and that of others is becoming larger and is being expressed in the legislation in more detailed form.

341. In many instances workers' obligations are developing parallel to those of employers. While employers, for example, are required to train and instruct workers in protective measures, workers are often obliged to observe the instructions given and to attend the training courses. (Endnote 81) Employers are required to provide personal protective equipment, while workers are required to make proper use of it. (Endnote 82) Where employers have to provide medical examinations of workers, the latter have to take the examinations. (Endnote 83) Of course, the obligations imposed on workers vary in their nature and detail. Nevertheless, in the law of many countries these obligations now cover the following questions:

(i) to make proper use of means provided for their health and safety, including personal protective equipment; and not to damage or remove guards and other safety devices; (Endnote 84)

(ii) not to carry out wilful or intentional acts likely to endanger themselves or others and to take care for their own and others' health and safety, particularly in respect of those who are carrying out any work under their supervision; (Endnote 85)

(iii) to notify the employer and others concerned of any fault or defect of which he may become aware; (Endnote 86)

(iv) to participate actively in organised safety arrangements at the workplace. (Endnote 87)

342. Specific regulations in many countries oblige employees in certain trades connected with the use of controlled substances, or who are exposed to occupational diseases, to submit themselves to regular medical examinations. (Endnote 88)

343. While the tendency towards spelling out workers' obligations clearly in the basic legislation may be increasing, in some countries there are very few obligations laid on employees with respect to safety and health matters. In France, for example, the only specific obligations laid on employees concern limited instances in which they are required to use protective clothing or equipment provided.

III. Relationship between the protection of the working environment and the protection of the general environment

344. The working environment is not a closed system isolated from the general environment. The relationship between the two environments in which people work and live is a complex problem which has only recently been approached by scientists. Its features are multiple and, if overlooked, may lead to disastrous consequences affecting the lives of the general public as well as of workers.

345. There is growing recognition on the part of the international community of the complementarity of and interaction between the working and general environments. A series of catastrophic accidents in many parts of the world (Three-Mile Island, Bhopal, Chernobyl and Basel (Sandoz) to name but a few) have created an awareness of the potential risks resulting from industrial activities to nature and society in general. As a result, the need for providing a satisfactory working environment for all workers now arises not only from the spread of risks to safety and health from industry to other occupations, but also beyond the worker to the public and the environment at large. At the same time one should not forget that the potential risks to the general public or environment may arise only in certain exceptional situations when they escape from the working environment. It is therefore in the working environment that the primary control should be exercised, and the approach taken should be that of ensuring co-ordination between the general environment and the working environment. In fact, one of the needs that the ILO's International Programme for the Improvement of Working Conditions and Environment (PIACT) is intended to meet is "the fact that problems of working conditions and environment should be approached globally within the framework of all aspects of economic, educational and social policy". (Endnote 89) It is consistent with this global approach that the concept of the relationship between the working and the general environments has found its way into recent international labour standards concerning occupational safety and health.

346. Recommendation No. 156 was the first ILO instrument to draw attention to this inter-relationship. Paragraph 15 of the Recommendation states: "In prescribing measures for the prevention and control of air pollution, noise and vibration in the working environment, the competent authority should take account of the relationship between the protection of the working environment and the protection of the general environment." (Endnote 90)

347. At its 71st Session in 1985 the International Labour Conference once again stressed the need for such measures at the national and international levels in the resolution concerning the promotion of measures against risks and accidents arising out of the use of dangerous substances and processes in industry. The resolution proposed in this respect the inclusion in the agenda of an early session of the International Labour Conference of the subject of hazard control and accident prevention related to the use of hazardous substances and processes in industry. In this respect the Committee recalls that in the revised classification of international labour Conventions and Recommendations (adopted recently by the Governing Body of the ILO), among the possible subjects for new instruments is included the subject of prevention of accidents arising out of the production and storage of dangerous substances. In the view of the Committee, the elaboration of such instruments would present a favourable occasion for further development of the principle of the inter-relationship between the protection of the working environment and the protection of the general environment.

348. National measures taken for the protection of the general environment in relation to hazards that may emanate from the working environment consist of a wide variety of legislative, administrative, scientific, educational and other practical actions, including public campaigns. The analysis of these measures, however, would fall outside the scope of the present survey, being a separate subject of a very complex nature.

349. It can be noted, nevertheless, that in occupational safety and health legislation itself there are often provisions dealing with the observance of general environmental laws (Endnote 91) or establishing safeguards against the pollution of the general environment. (Endnote 92) The content and the extent of these provisions vary greatly in different countries. The same applies to a number of different practical measures highlighted by some governments in their reports. A few examples may illustrate the vastness of the subject. According to the report of the Government of Cyprus, for instance, a special service has been established within the Factory Inspectorate for the protection of the general environment in relation to the working environment.

350. In Tunisia the Industrial Real Estate Agency was created in 1973 to see that industrial zones are separated from populated areas and organised in such a way as to prevent pollution of the general environment. Since 1977 the Government has been implementing a programme of placing small undertakings outside the city limits of the capital in order to reduce the possibility of industrial accidents. (Endnote 93)

351. In conclusion, the Committee of Experts finds that the information supplied in a number of reports shows that the question of the relation between the working and the general environment is receiving considerable attention from governments, employers and workers, giving practical effect to the concept enunciated in Recommendation No. 156.

C. Establishment of criteria and exposure limits

352. Many dangerous substances and processes in actual use await the development of acceptable replacements or other protective techniques ensuring the highest possible degree of protection. This is the reason that permissible concentrations should be established so as to provide guidance in assessing the degree of hazard presented by the working environment and to study and supervise preventive or protective measures. Internationally accepted exposure standards would make it possible to ensure adequate safeguards for the greatest possible number of workers and, by the same token, would avoid a multiplicity of divergent national standards which could interfere with international trade.

I. Requirements of the Convention

353. Article 8, paragraph 1 of the Convention provides that the competent authority shall establish criteria for determining the hazards of exposure to air pollution, noise and vibration in the working environment and, where appropriate, shall specify exposure limits on the basis of these criteria. In doing so the competent authority is required by paragraph 2 to take into account the opinion of technically competent persons designated by the most representative organisations of employers and workers concerned. Finally, the established criteria and exposure limits should be supplemented and revised regularly in the light of current national and international knowledge and data, taking into account as far as possible any increase in occupational hazards resulting from simultaneous exposure to several harmful factors at the workplace (paragraph 3).

354. It should be noted that the term "exposure limit" was used for the first time by the International Labour Conference in drafting Convention No. 148. The term was coined as a general expression that is intended to embrace the various formulations currently used to refer to quality limit values in workplaces, such as "maximum allowable concentration", "threshold limit value", "permissible level", "limit value", "average limit value", "permissible limit", "time-weighted average", "industrial hygiene standards", etc. It was intended to replace expressions referring to allowable or permissible limits. The reason for the change is that "allowable" or "permissible" seems to imply an administrative decision, which is not always the case at the national level, or to suggest a biological harmlessness which in fact is not necessarily a reliable guide. (Endnote 94)

355. In this connection attention should be drawn to the fact that Convention No. 148 does not require that exposure limits should be prescribed by legislation. Article 8 of the Convention requires the competent authority to establish criteria and exposure limits. As was pointed out earlier, Article 4(2) of the Convention specified that provisions concerning the implementation of the prescribed measures may be adopted by means of technical standards, codes of practice and other appropriate methods. Such non-statutory measures may be made binding by statutory reference thereto.

356. Several reasons argue in favour of the adoption of non-statutory standards, particularly in developing countries. Codes and guide-lines can be revised easily when new knowledge or experience becomes available, while statutory prescriptions require considerably more time for their adoption and revision. Also the Meeting of Experts on Policies for the Establishment of Occupational Exposure Limits to Chemical Substances in the Working Environment held by the ILO in 1983 "strongly suggested that there were very significant advantages in not normally incorporating the numerical values for exposure limits directly in the legislation. Reference to the principle of exposure limits in legislation was, however, considered desirable". (Endnote 95)

357. Another important feature of flexibility contained in Article 8 of the Convention is that the duty of the competent authority to establish criteria and exposure limits was qualified by the phrase "where appropriate" which enables member States to make, for example, a modest start on a programme for setting exposure limits on a substance-by-substance basis. Where specific criteria for particular hazards cannot readily be laid down, more general criteria may also be appropriate. What is necessary is that the criteria should provide a basis on which the competent authority can, as appropriate, reach a decision as to exposure limits in the light of its assessment of the health risks involved. In supervising the application of the Convention in ratifying States, the Committee of Experts has always noted with interest any standards which introduce criteria and exposure limits for new occupational hazards not previously covered, thus giving better effect to Article 8 of the Convention. The Recommendation No. 156 also approaches this subject from the point of view of fixing in appropriate cases the emission levels of machinery and installations as regards air pollution, noise and vibrations (Paragraph 8).

358. In addition to what is prescribed in Convention No. 148 and Recommendation No. 156, the subject of determining criteria and setting exposure limits in respect of different noxious substances is dealt with in a number of other ILO Conventions and Recommendations concerning occupational safety and health. The Benzene Convention (No. 136) and Recommendation (No. 144), 1971, for example, provide that the competent authority should fix a maximum of concentration of benzene in the air of places of employment that should not exceed a ceiling value of 25 parts per million (80 mg/m 3). Recommendation No. 144 further provides that this maximum should be lowered as soon as possible if medical evidence shows this to be desirable. The Occupational Cancer Convention (No. 139), 1974, lays down measures for the control of the use of carcinogenic substances and agents in the working environment, and its accompanying Recommendation No. 147 calls on the competent authority to establish criteria for determining the degree of exposure to the substances or agents in question, and where appropriate to specify levels as indicators for surveillance of the working environment. Maximum permissible doses of ionising radiations which may be received from sources external to or internal to the body and maximum permissible amounts of radioactive substances which can be taken into the body, should be fixed for various categories of workers in accordance with the Radiation Protection Convention (No. 115) and Recommendation (No. 114), 1960. The most recent ILO instruments on this subject were adopted in 1986, the Asbestos Convention (No. 162) and Recommendation (No. 172), which also contain provision to prescribe limits for the exposure of workers to asbestos.

359. It is common to all the instruments mentioned above to require that established criteria and exposure limits should be periodically reviewed and updated in the light of technological progress and advances in scientific knowledge, particular consideration being given to the latest information contained in the codes of practice, guides or other sources provided by the ILO or other competent bodies.

II. Current international data and national standards of general reference

360. According to Article 8, paragraph 3, of Convention No. 148, criteria and exposure limits shall be established, supplemented and revised regularly "in the light of current national and international knowledge and data". Paragraph 14 of Recommendation No. 156 specifies that "in prescribing measures for the prevention and control of air pollution, noise and vibration in the working environment, the competent authority should take into consideration the most recent codes of practice or guides established by the International Labour Office and the conclusions of meetings of experts which may be convened by the International Labour Office, as well as information from other competent bodies".

361. There are two basic sources of reference for the purpose of these provisions of the instruments: (a) data and research provided by the competent international institutions of a governmental or non-governmental character, and (b) standards adopted at the national level, particularly those of the most advanced countries which set examples widely followed by other countries.

362. The need for international co-operation and the establishment of international guide-lines for general reference in the field of prevention and protection against hazards in the working environment, is particularly evident when only a limited number of countries can mobilise the necessary resources, considerable volume of special equipment and large number of specialised personnel to carry out all the work necessary to cover most occupational hazards. By drawing on the efforts of many countries it is possible to avoid costly duplication of work, generate comparable epidemiological statistics and adopt comparable criteria that may eventually lead to the establishment of generally accepted exposure limit values. Developing countries should benefit from the results of research undertaken at international level, from exchanges of information and knowledge, and from safety and health measures taken in connection with the transfer of technology.

363. The role of international institutions in developing common theoretical as well as practical approaches is all the more important as the limits recommended for given hazards and consequently the measures of protection, often vary from one country to another. Some such differences arise from different concepts of what constitutes damage to health, and others result from the different experimental and epidemiological methods used to establish the limits. Resolution of such differences would be assisted by greater international co-operation and by dissemination of information on the criteria and procedures used in establishing permissible limits, as well as by creating common methodology for the testing and evaluation of health hazards in the working environment. This work is being carried out by a number of international organisations, such as the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the World Health Organisation (WHO), the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO), the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC), and the Permament Commission and International Association of Occupational Health (PCIAOH). Other organisations such as the Commission of the European Communities (CEC) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA) are active at the regional level. Still others, for instance the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), provide recommendations on criteria and exposure limits in respect of specific hazards.

364. The ILO's International Programme for the Improvement of Working Conditions and Environment (PIACT), the WHO's Workers' Health Programme and the inter-agency UNEP/ILO/WHO International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) constitute examples of effective international co-operation in this field. The ISO has an elaborate programme for the preparation of international standards on sampling strategies and the measurement of airborne substances, noise and vibration which is particularly useful for countries with highly developed occupational hygiene services. The OECD Chemicals Programme and the OECD Guide-lines for the Testing of Chemicals, Provisional OECD Data Interpretation Guides, and OECD Principles of Good Laboratory Practice which have been prepared under the Chemicals Programme, also have direct relevance to preventive measures in the area of occupational safety. A long-term programme for the development of the system of standards on occupational safety and health is pursued by the CMEA and accounts at present for 74 CMEA standards adopted in this field.

365. ILO activities connected with the elaboration of criteria and exposure limits for different hazards in the working environment are numerous and diversified. In the general framework of the PIACT programme they range from standard setting to provision of equipment and technical advice. A considerable part of the activities of the ILO consists of the provision of information. In the collection and dissemination of information on criteria and exposure limits various ILO programmes are involved: the International Occupational Safety and Health Information Centre (CIS), the International Occupational Safety and Health Hazard Alert System, and the ILO programme of publications including various codes of practice, the Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety, and the Occupational Safety and Health Series. Questions of occupational safety and health dealing with air pollution, noise and vibration have frequently appeared on the agenda of ILO Industrial Committees with special reports being prepared by the Office. The ILO Governing Body from time to time convened small meetings of experts to examine specific problems and to advise it on action which might be taken. The reports of these meetings on many occasions constitute a first step to the adoption later of Conventions and Recommendations. Some expert meetings are entrusted with the task of preparing codes of practice in the field of safety and health. (Endnote 96)

366. In all of the above-mentioned activities the ILO collaborates closely with the WHO through the Joint ILO/WHO Committee on Occupational Health. The criteria applied and the exposure limits recommended by these two organisations are of a complementary character. In fact, the term "exposure limit" at present has two definitions. One is the concentration in the air of a harmful substance or the intensity of noise and vibration which is not considered, in the light of present scientific knowledge, to cause adverse health effects, including long-term effects and effects on future generations of workers exposed to a normal work schedule. The other is the level of exposure permitted, taking account of both the medical evidence and what is reasonably achievable in the workplace, but which does not ensure that ill effects will not occur, albeit in a very small proportion of workers who are exposed for a considerable period.

367. The first definition corresponds to the "health-based exposure limits" introduced by WHO and established only on medical and scientific data. These health-based exposure limits indicate the target to be achieved in providing absolute security to the workers. The second definition reflects the ILO approach of defining operational levels which could be implemented at the workplace, and corresponds to Article 8 of Convention No. 148, according to which the competent authority shall establish criteria for determining the hazards of exposure to air pollution, noise and vibration in the working place. The operational exposure limits envisaged by the ILO are based on the values of health-based exposure limits, modified as necessary after evaluation of their acceptability at the national level and their feasibility at the plant level.

368. As may be seen, there is no contradiction between the WHO and ILO approaches. On the contrary, they are complementary and may be regarded as constituting distinctive stages in the process of transferring absolute or target values into operational ones. In fact, the Meeting of Experts on Policies for the Establishment of Occupational Exposure Limits to Chemical Substances in the Working Environment held by the ILO in 1983 recommended a two-stage procedure in establishing permissible levels in occupational exposure to harmful agents, which is also advocated in WHO Technical Report No. 601. First, the derivation of exposure limits which are purely health based; secondly, the conversion of health-based exposure limits into operational occupational exposure limits which take account of other relevant but non-medical factors such as technical, social and economic considerations. (Endnote 97) As both concepts have distinct merits, member States could adopt the concept most appropriate to their situation. Convention No. 148 does not express any preference in this respect, leaving the establishment of criteria and exposure limits to the discretion of the competent national authority.

369. In line with ILO policy, Convention No. 148 aims at the definition of operational levels which could be implemented at the workplace. It should be kept in mind that as operational values do not always coincide with the health-based levels, it is necessary that at the workplace every effort should be made to reduce the exposure as far as possible below the numerical value of the exposure limit. Convention No. 148 and Recommendation No. 156 provide for administrative, technical, organisational and other measures to be taken to that end, which will be examined in subsequent sections of the survey.

III. Air pollution

370. The operational exposure limits referred to above have been recommended by the ILO in respect of numerous air pollutants. With respect to air pollution attention should be drawn to Publication No. 37 of the Occupational Safety and Health Series on Occupational Exposure Limits for Airborne Toxic Substances (Endnote 98) which provides a review of the present approach to the problem of exposure limits to noxious substances in the working environment and presents, in tabular form, the limits prescribed or recommended in a number of countries. Subject to the specific and detailed explanations given in the various lists (toxic substances, particulate matter and carcinogens), this publication allows a certain amount of comparison of criteria and values applied in the countries reviewed and may help official services, professional organisations and management to gain a wider insight into this complex problem. A new revised edition of this publication is currently being prepared by the ILO in collaboration with the International Register of Potentially Toxic Chemicals (IRPTC) of UNEP.

371. The ILO has also issued the Code of Practice on Occupational Exposure to Airborne Substances Harmful to Health (Endnote 99) which sets objectives to be attained in successive stages in different countries and enterprises according to local circumstances and possibilities. Chapter 3 of this Code contains detailed provisions on the establishment and application of exposure limits for harmful airborne substances.

372. In supervising the application of Article 8 of Convention No. 148 in respect of air pollution, the Committee of Experts has often inquired what criteria and exposure limits have been established or are considered to be necessary for some particular groups of agents such as non-ionising radiation. In this respect the Committee would like to draw attention to ILO Occupational Safety and Health Series No. 57 -- Protection of workers against radio-frequency and microwave radiation -- A technical review as well as to issue No. 53 entitled Occupational hazards from non-ionising electromagnetic radiation, both prepared as part of the PIACT programme in collaboration with the International Non-Ionising Radiation Committee (INIRC) of the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA).

373. At the national level, the first lists of maximum allowable concentrations of airborne toxic substances at the workplace were issued between 1933 and 1938 in the USSR (the first country to make them a statutory obligation), the United States and Germany. In more recent years a number of other developed countries have followed suit by establishing their own national lists. A few examples may be given to illustrate this process.

374. In Czechoslovakia an official list of maximum allowable concentrations was established in 1954 and subsequently updated. In 1955 the first national commission in a Western European country dealing with occupational exposure limits was established in the Federal Republic of Germany. At first the commission limited its activities to publishing the list of threshold limit values (TLV) recommended by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), but since 1969 it has started publishing its own annual list. In Denmark the working party of the Committee on Safety in the Chemical Industry started publishing lists of exposure limits in 1961, and since 1976 the list of control limit values is regularly established by the Labour Inspectorate. The 1984 list includes "Hygienic limit values" for about 600 substances. In Bulgaria on the basis of the Public Health Act the Ministry of Public Health adopted in 1971 a table of maximum allowable concentrations of harmful substances in the air of working areas which at present covers a total of 258 substances. In Finland limit values for toxic substances were issued by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health in 1972. In the Netherlands a two-stage process for establishing exposure limits was introduced in 1977: first, a committee of experts reviews the available data and submits it to the National Committee; which at the second stage makes the final recommendations to be approved by the Labour Inspectorate. In Italy in 1978 a Technical Committee on exposure limits to dangerous substances was created in the Ministry of Labour and published a list of recommended exposure limits. In the United Kingdom the first national list of occupational exposure limits was published by the Health and Safety Commission in 1984 in Guidance Note EH 40, and updated in 1985.

375. Notwithstanding these recent developments, only a few countries have set up the machinery necessary for determining exposure limits and keeping them under continuous revision. Other countries generally establish their lists on the basis of the values prescribed by one of these countries. In this connection the most widely used lists are those prepared and updated each year in the United States and in the USSR. The United States ACGIH list is widely recognised in a great number of countries as a reference criterion of good practice and is published by the labour inspectorates of several countries as a guide (for example, in Belgium and Italy). The 1976 edition of this list, which is the most recent available, included 537 substances, 43 carcinogens, 28 nuisance particulates and 12 simple asphyxiants. Another United States list establishing a federal standard is published jointly by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA); the 1976 edition of this list included 385 substances and 13 carcinogens.

376. The USSR list is prepared by the official permanent commission regularly engaged in determining maximum allowable concentrations in the air of the workplace and is published by the Ministry of Health. With the advice of the Institute of Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Diseases of Moscow, USSR Academy of Medical Sciences, these values are declared as state standards and are legally binding as absolute limits. The 1976 edition of this list included 646 substances and 57 dusts.

377. The criteria and methods for determining exposure limits in the countries examined in the present survey, vary depending on which approach they follow. They vary in practice between the stringent USSR concept of maximum allowable concentrations (MAC) which in no case should produce biological or functional changes, and the more elastic approach of the ACGIH of the United States, whose threshold limit values (TLV) make allowance for reversible clinical changes. These two kinds of criteria for determining exposure limits by the two countries are described as follows in the ILO's Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety:

USSR maximum allowable concentration. The MAC as defined in the USSR is that concentration of a harmful substance in the air of the working area which, in the case of daily exposure at work for 8-hour working day, throughout the entire working life, will not cause any disease or deviation from a normal state of health of the workers or of their offspring, detectable by current methods of investigation, either during the work itself or in the long term.

USA ACGIH threshold limit value. The term TLV refers to concentrations of air contaminants in the working environment to which it is believed nearly all workers may be exposed repeatedly, day after day, without adverse effect. A TLV-TWA is a time-weighted average for a normal 8-hour workday or 40-hour workweek. Exposure above this limit may occur if compensated, during the workday, by equivalent exposure below the limit.

378. While the USSR MAC values and the USA ACGIH TLV appear to be the most widely used, other countries adopt different approaches and establish different values.

379. Two types of exposure limits have been established in the Federal Republic of Germany: "maximum permissible concentrations" (MAK) which according to current knowledge will not generally impair the health of workers after repeated exposure for an average of eight hours per day and 40 hours per week over a long period, and "technical reference concentrations" (TRK) used for substances for which MAK values confirmed by toxicological and occupational medical experience cannot be defined at present. The TRK values are used mainly for carcinogens, and indicate concentration of air contaminants to which the requisite protective measures and monitoring of the workplace are to be geared. MAK values have so far been established for about 350, and TRK values for 18 substances and groups of substances. It should be particularly stressed that these values are established after independent consideration and are not based on exposure limits established in other countries. The Federal Republic of Germany's MAK values are also used in Luxembourg by the Accident Insurance Association.

380. In the Netherlands MAC values -- maximum accepted concentrations -- are defined as average concentrations which, as far as is known at present, do not cause detrimental effects to the health of normal, healthy workers or their offspring after repeated exposure of eight hours per day and 40 hours per week over a whole working life; or as ceiling values which should never be exceeded. It is noted that MAC values do not guarantee safety and concentrations should therefore be kept as low as possible.

381. In Italy the advisory exposure limits published are based on values believed not to endanger workers' health except in cases of hypersensitivity or predisposition due to genetic factors, primary organic or functional disorders or drug interactions.

382. Other types of exposure limits are also in use in a number of countries for dealing with particular situations in the working environment. A "short-term exposure level" (STEL) may be prescribed for short exposures not exceeding a specified duration. The United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration refers to a "permissible exposure limit" (PEL) which is a work-shift TWA level. The "immediately dangerous to life and health" (IDLH) concentration represents a maximum level from which one could escape within 30 minutes without any escape-impairing symptoms or any irreversible health effects.

383. In Poland, for example, the exposure limits prescribed include maximum allowable concentrations (MAC), instantaneous concentrations to which exposure may not exceed 30 minutes, and threshold concentrations in which no work can be performed. (Endnote 100)

384. Some countries specify in their national lists only maximum exposure limits, (Endnote 101) while others indicate both an average and maximum limit (Endnote 102) or a maximum and a tolerated limit. (Endnote 103) The national list for 1978-79 adopted in the Netherlands included different definitions of maximum accepted concentrations used in several other countries for reference.

385. As regards methods of establishing exposure limits, two basic approaches have been noted: adoption of official, legally binding standards, and establishment of advisory standards as indications of good practice. Between these two extremities the legal status of exposure limits varies widely from country to country, the general trend in developed countries being to make them increasingly compulsory. The majority of countries are still in the intermediate position: their national lists may be enforced by indirect means, while for certain substances there are statutory obligations. In certain countries the exposure limits are included in collective agreements by branch of industry. (Endnote 104)

386. The intermediate position is typical, for example, for many Western European countries. In the Federal Republic of Germany, Greece and Luxembourg, statutory limit values are prescribed for vinyl chloride, and in Belgium and the Netherlands they are established also for asbestos. In France such substances as benzene, methyl bromide and carbon monoxide are added to that list. In the United Kingdom the substances covered by statutory limits include acrylonistrile, carbon disulphide, ethylene oxide, isocyanates, lead, styrene, trichlorocthylene, vinyl chlorides.

387. In Spain, apart from benzene and asbestos, criteria and exposure limits were adopted in 1986 for metallic lead and its inorganic compounds, and vinyl chloride monomer, maximum concentrations for carbonic acids are also fixed. (Endnote 105)

388. In Finland the exposure limits to asbestos, benzene and lead are statutorily specified and, as far as other substances are concerned, the labour protection authority inspecting a workplace is entitled to determine legally binding maximum contents of impurities in the air for each workplace. In order to facilitate this decision-making process the National Board of Labour Protection has published a safety bulletin on the impurities in the air at the workplace, which includes normative, non-binding limits required by industrial hygiene for about 500 compounds and groups of compounds.

389. According to the Government's Article 22 Report on Convention No. 148, proposals are to be prepared for binding limits on impurities in the air by the newly established Labour Protection Committee on Chemistry composed of experts nominated by the authorities and by the labour market parties.

390. No legally enforceable exposure limits seem to be established in Denmark, Ireland and Italy. However, in all of the above-mentioned countries except Greece, the competent authorities publish lists of advisory exposure limits which are taken as an indicator of compliance with the statutory requirements for the protection of workers. In France, for instance, these limits are published by the Government in circulars which so far cover approximately 80 substances. In Ireland and Spain the national inspection authorities accept the TLV recommended by the ACGIH.

391. In the framework of the European Economic Community measures are under way to adopt common limit values for 100 chemical agents frequently present in the working environment, and a new directive has been proposed to the Council for this purpose. (Endnote 106)

392. Legally enforceable national lists of exposure limits have been established, for example, in Brazil, Bulgaria, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Mexico, Poland, USSR, United States, Venezuela and Yugoslavia.

393. Many countries have adopted special regulations dealing with occupational hazards due to air pollution and the use of dangerous substances, which lay down detailed protective measures and fix exposure limits for certain specified substances, dusts, gases and fumes. (Endnote 107)

394. The range of dangerous agents present in the air of the working environment, exposure to which is regulated in the national legislation, varies greatly from country to country. The most common hazards covered include toxic chemicals, dusts and ionising radiations. In Egypt, for example, criteria and exposure limits are established as regards the following classes of pollutants: gases and vapour, dusts and liquid toxic particles in the atmosphere, natural dusts, dangerous substances; carcinogenic substances are listed but no exposure limits to them are prescribed.

395. The Mexican legislation establishes maximum exposure limits that should not be exceeded at the workplace in respect of ionising radiations, non-ionising electromagnetic radiations (including radio and microwaves, laser radiation, infra-red, ultraviolet and visible radiations) and solid, liquid and gaseous pollutants, including dangerous substances. (Endnote 108)

396. The standards adopted by the Venezuelan Commission on Industrial Standards (COVENIN) establish criteria and maximum permissible concentrations of chemical substances, carcinogens, some substances of variable composition, dusts and lead. (Endnote 109)

397. In Brazil tolerated limits calculated on the basis of exposure for 48 hours per week are established for approximately 200 chemical substances. If these limits are exceeded, the activities concerned will be classified as dangerous or unhealthy and fall under corresponding statutory provisions applicable to such activities. For some of those substances maximum limit values are also established that should never be exceeded in the working environment. Criteria and exposure limits are also laid down for certain mineral dusts and for ionising radiations. (Endnote 110) As the Government has indicated in its Article 22 Reports on Convention No. 148, these standards are revised annually and are discussed with technical experts and workers' and employers' organisations. Trade unions also have the right to appeal to the Ministry of Labour in order to designate activities to be classified as dangerous. (Endnote 111)

398. The criteria and exposure limits analysed by the Committee of Experts show that only in some particular cases is account being taken of the increase in occupational hazards resulting from simultaneous exposure to several harmful factors at the workplace, as is required by Article 8, paragraph 3, of Convention No. 148. The basic reason for this is apparently that current scientific knowledge is in many respects insufficient to define the results of cumulative exposure to several substances at once, or their mixtures or in combination with other hazards in the working environment. Some general provisions may, however, be found in national legislation, which is intended to ensure a higher level of protection in case of such simultaneous exposure. In Czechoslovakia, for example, occupational hygiene services can fix average exposure limits below the maximum allowable concentrations when there is exposure to several harmful factors or other unfavourable conditions are present. (Endnote 112)

399. In its comments addressed to ratifying countries on Convention No. 148, the Committee of Experts has consistently drawn attention to the need to take into account in establishing criteria and exposure limits, the increase in occupational hazards that may result from simultaneous exposure to several harmful factors at the workplace. (Endnote 113)

400. In countries where exposure limits were established by one of the ways explained above, arrangements also exist for their revision and updating in the light of current national and international knowledge. These arrangements may be divided roughly into two types: those providing for a continuous revision carried out by a specially instituted competent national body, and those providing for periodic revision from time to time, for which purpose an ad hoc technical body may be established. The arrangements of the first type exist as a rule in countries which produce their own national lists of exposure limits. In the Federal Republic of Germany it is the Committee on Dangerous Substances in the Workplace which is permanently engaged on this work, in the Netherlands -- the National MAC Commission, in the United Kingdom -- the Advisory Committee on Toxic Substances, and in Poland -- the Interministerial Commission for Amendments of the List of Maximum Allowable Concentration of Harmful Agents in the Working Environment. Apart from such specially created bodies of a technical character composed of qualified experts, and entrusted with setting exposure limits to dangerous substances in the working environment, in the majority of countries there are a number of other agencies and institutions engaged in the elaboration, revision and adoption of criteria and exposure limits for air pollutants in general. In some countries this function goes to the labour inspectorate, (Endnote 114) in others to insurance agencies. (Endnote 115) In many countries the leading authority in these matters is the National Commission on Occupational Safety and Health or a similar body which exercises the overall responsibility for elaborating and co-ordinating the national policy in this area. (Endnote 116) It is under this authority that in some countries the relevant expert committees are established. (Endnote 117) In the majority of cases such national commissions, and expert committees created under their aegis, are of a tripartite character and include nominated representatives of employers' and workers' organisations. In Venezuela, for example, the representatives of the central workers' and employers' organisations form part of the membership of the National Council of Occupational Prevention, Health and Safety and its executive organ, the National Institute of Occupational Prevention, Health and Safety, as well as of the Commission entrusted with the revision of the Regulations on Hygiene and Safety Conditions at Work, which provide for the establishment and revision of appropriate standards on criteria and exposure limits. (Endnote 118)

401. It is through the participation of the employers' and workers' representatives and of technically qualified experts designated by their respective organisations in such national bodies and committees that the requirements of Article 8, paragraph 2, of Convention No. 148 are met in most countries which have established exposure limits in question.

402. It should be noted that in many countries the law empowers the competent authorities to prescribe legally binding exposure limits, and appropriate action may thus be taken whenever considered necessary. A number of governments have indicated in their reports that such action is actually under way. New legislation on the prevention of air pollution by dusts and asbestos will soon come into effect in Luxembourg. In Malaysia the Factories and Machinery (Mineral Process) and the Factories and Machinery (Asbestos Process) Regulations will establish permissible exposure limits for 27 substances and dusts and for asbestos. In Ecuador, according to the Government's report, maximum permissible concentrations of toxic substances in the atmosphere at the workplace will be specified in the recommendations appended to the new general occupational safety and health regulations to be adopted soon after the process of tripartite consultations is concluded. In the United Kingdom tripartite consultations are going on concerning the preparation of the draft Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations which, among other things, would ensure the necessary statutory backing for the occupational exposure limits recommended by the Health and Safety Commission, and lay down requirements for the appointment of a competent person to assess and monitor the air pollution levels at workplaces not covered by the existing legislation. (Endnote 119)

403. One government, while indicating that its legislation empowers the minister concerned to issue orders specifying permissible levels of toxic substances in the working area of a factory, stated that "it would not be possible to specify any occupational exposure limits as these limits may change from time to time and legal instruments are too inflexible in their application". (Endnote 120) The Committee of Experts would point in this connection to the practice of establishing advisory exposure limits, highlighted above.

404. In conclusion, it should be recalled that in the majority of the countries surveyed, no criteria for exposure limits to air pollution have ever been established, this fact undermining considerably the effectiveness of whatever other measures of protection have been prescribed. The Committee would stress that the instruments on the working environment provide for the establishment of criteria and exposure limits as the key requirement upon which the use of other protective measures is conditioned in many instances. It is therefore essential for the implementation of Convention No. 148 that such limits be established at the national level, by any of the methods explained above.

IV. Noise and vibration

405. The subjects of noise and vibration have been dealt with extensively in a number of ILO studies and publications. Particular mention should be made of Publication No. 33 of the Occupational Safety and Health Series Noise and Vibration in the Working Environment (Endnote 121) and of the ILO Code of Practice on the Protection of Workers against Noise and Vibration in the Working Environment. (Endnote 122) The appendices to the Code of Practice contain extensive references to existing international standards on criteria and exposure limits to noise and vibration, in particular those set by the ISO and recommended in publications of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).

406. Recommended criteria and exposure limits to noise are set out in Chapters 3 and 4 of the Code which deal respectively with noise measurement and assessment, and noise limit levels. According to section 4.2.1 of the Code, to prevent a risk of hearing impairment and depending on the degree of protection wanted, the following limit values should be determined --

(a) a warning limit value that sets the noise level under which there is very little risk of hearing impairment to an unprotected ear for an eight-hour exposure; and

(b) a danger limit value that sets the noise level above which hearing impairment and deafness may result from an eight-hour daily exposure of an unprotected ear.

In the light of present knowledge, section 4.2.2 of the Code recommends a warning limit value of 85 decibels (dB(A)), and a danger limit value of 90 dB(A).

407. Section 4.3 of the Code sets out some values for special circumstances and provides in particular that, no matter for how short a time, a worker should not, without appropriate ear protection, enter an area in which the noise level is 115 dB(A) or more. The Code also recommends that levels of exposure to ultrasound and infrasound should be reduced and kept at a reasonable value (section 4.4) referring to some examples of national standards on that subject.

408. For the sake of completeness, it should be mentioned that the noise exposure limit of 90 dB(A) is also suggested in the ILO's Code of Practice on Safety and Hygiene in Shipbuilding and Ship Repairing (section 2.8.1) and in its Code of Practice on Safe Construction and Operation of Tractors (section 10.0.1).

409. As regards vibration, existing scientific knowledge was not yet sufficient in 1977 to allow the establishment of numerical exposure limits in the Code of Practice on the Protection of Workers against Noise and Vibration in the Working Environment, which simply requires that maximum permissible levels of vibration be fixed in respect of (a) vibration affecting the hands and arms (vibrating tools), and (b) whole-body vibration transmitted through the supporting surface. In the Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety it is said that "exposure to whole-body vibration of certain frequency ranges (4-5 and 8-12 Hz) is associated with resonance phenomena (increase in oscillation amplitude of the anatomic organ and system structures), and vibration of these frequencies therefore has the most adverse effects". (Endnote 123) It may be added that the principal international standard laying down some criteria for exposure to vibration is the ISO Standard 2631 -- 1978: "Guide for the evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration". (Endnote 124)

410. The situation as regards fixing criteria for and exposure limits to noise and vibration in the member States differs in many respects from that concerning air pollution.

411. First of all, there do not seem to be any national standards of general reference, as is the case for air pollution, which set approaches generally followed by other countries. There is, on the other hand, greater reliance on the standards developed at the international level and, in respect of noise at least, greater similarity in the criteria used for evaluating the hazards and in the exposure limits adopted on the basis of these criteria. Some countries expressly refer to international standards for the purpose of application of their national regulations. In Brazil, for example, criteria and exposure limits for vibration set out in ISO standards ISO 2631 and ISO/DIS 5349 are applied. (Endnote 125) The Government of Yugoslavia also indicated that for vibration international standards are applied while national standards are being prepared; and for noise, measurements (calibration) are carried out in compliance with ISO Recommendation R.495. (Endnote 126) Argentinian regulations on noise prescribe compliance with different international standards established by IEC. (Endnote 127) In many other countries national provisions on noise and vibration are improved by the standards established by the competent international organisations, and several governments particularly mentioned that criteria and exposure limits recommended by the ILO were primarily taken into account.

412. Another particularity that may be observed as regards national standards on noise and vibration, is that in general they tend to be more recent than those concerning air pollution. In fact, for the most part such national standards have been adopted only in the present decade. In the United States, for example, standards on noise were adopted and codified as general industry standards in 1985, while in a number of countries the process of incorporation of noise and vibration standards into the system of safety and health regulations has not yet been completed. This accounts for the fact that not much information is available to the Committee of Experts on questions related to the implementation, revision and updating of such standards, as the appropriate procedures in some countries have as yet to be developed.

413. It is also true that fewer countries have adopted national provisions regulating exposure to noise and vibration than is the case for exposure to air pollution. This is particularly apparent for vibration, in respect of which only some ten to 15 countries have established some sort of exposure standards and protective regulations.

414. The legal status of standards on noise and vibration varies considerably from country to country, showing the same pattern as standards on air pollution examined above. In some countries, for example in the socialist countries, these standards are obligatory for the whole of the economy, while in others they may be simple recommendations. There are countries where these standards are enforced on an administrative basis and where they may be used as evidence in courts.

415. As to the content of the national provisions on noise and vibration, they range from the simple recognition of noise and vibration as occupational hazards requiring preventive and protective measures, which is the case for quite a number of countries; to having scores of technical standards and regulations where every possible measure of detection, monitoring, measuring, controlling, etc. of noise and vibration is set out. National systems of occupational safety standards of States Members of the Council of Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA) present an example of the latter approach. The majority of countries which have adopted national provisions on noise and vibration, however, may be situated in the intermediate position, clearly showing a tendency to developing a comprehensive set of general as well as technical regulations on the subject.

416. One more general factor contributing to the complexity of analysis of the content of national regulations concerned, is that while in the majority of countries noise and vibration are treated as separate occupational hazards, in some countries no such distinction is drawn, and vibration is generally considered to be an extension of the concept of noise. (Endnote 128) The report of the United States stated, for example, that "vibration is treated and measured as a noise level".

417. It may be seen from this wide variation in approaches that the regulation of noise and vibration at the workplace is still in a period of development. It is particularly revealing that in the recent EEC Council Directive on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to noise at work, adopted on 12 May 1986, it is recognised that "the current situation in the member States does not make it possible to fix a noise-exposure value below which there is no longer any risk to workers' hearing", and that "current scientific knowledge about the effects that exposure to noise may have on health, other than on hearing, does not enable precise safety levels to be set". (Endnote 129) In this situation the role of the ILO instruments on the working environment in guiding efforts at the national level is all the more important, and further serious efforts on the part of the ILO and other competent international organisations is needed to bring better and more uniform protection to working people and to helping governments in achieving this aim.

418. In surveying the legislation of the reporting countries, the Committee has to express its concern over the fact that in the large majority of them the legislation does not even mention noise and vibration as distinct occupational hazards. Even less does it provide for special measures of protection for workers exposed to these risks. In some countries these hazards are simply indicated in the relevant general provisions of the legislation as requiring adequate protective measures, though no specific measures have yet been prescribed. (Endnote 130) In a number of other countries some protective measures, sometimes quite extensive ones, are laid down in the legislation which, however, does not yet establish any criteria or exposure limits concerning noise and vibration, as provided for in the instruments on the working environment.

419. The Committee is concerned also by the fact that very few of these countries have indicated in their reports that measures are being taken to regulate occupational exposure to noise and vibration. Of those which have mentioned this, the Government of Malaysia stated in its report that the Factories and Machinery (Noise Exposure) Regulations are being discussed with employers' and workers' organisations, and pending their implementation enforcement is carried out on an administrative basis. Regulations on noise and vibration are also being prepared in Sri Lanka, according to the Government's report.

420. As regards Western European countries members of the EEC, their legislation and administrative provisions should be brought into compliance with the EEC Directive on Noise mentioned above by 1 January 1990. For Greece an additional one-year transition period was granted (EEC Directive on Noise, article 13).

421. The Government of Luxembourg, indicated in its report that protective measures against noise are prescribed by the Accident Insurance Association and that legislation to give effect to the EEC Directive on Noise is under preparation.

422. No mention of setting any criteria and exposure limits to noise and vibration is made in the relevant legislation of Japan. In fact the only provision found in the legislation and referred to in the Government's report concerns "an indoor workshop which produces a tremendous noise" where the employer is required to install partitions or to take other measures necessary to prevent such noise from being propagated. (Endnote 131) There are no provisions in respect of vibration.

423. This situation is even more prevalent as concerns vibration. Some protective measures against risks due to vibration are prescribed, but no criteria for evaluating them and no exposure limits are supplied. (Endnote 132)

424. Besides the Government of the United Kingdom, the Austrian and Luxembourg Governments also indicated in their reports that there is insufficient experience to draw up any regulations as regards protection against vibration and therefore no special provisions exist on criteria, exposure limits or medical examination of workers in case of exposure to vibrations. In Colombia, on the other hand, while no exposure limits to vibration are prescribed, the legislation sets out detailed protective measures to be taken. (Endnote 133)

425. A certain insight into the problem on the basis of more extensive experience in dealing with vibrations is given in the information reported by the Norwegian Government in its last Article 22 Report on Convention No. 148. It stated that a total of seven Norwegian standards exist in the field of vibrations including standards on whole-body and hand-arm vibrations, all of which refer to the relevant ISO standards. (Endnote 134) But these standards are not binding and have a recommendatory character. However, the labour inspectorate does not operate with general limits for vibration and deals only with medical questions concerning vibration injuries. Such injuries, of which there were 15 in 1984, are reported to the inspectorate as occupational diseases. The real figure, in the opinion of the Government, could be ten to 100 times higher if all types of vibration injury were taken into account. Studies undertaken by the Central Bureau of Statistics in 1983 stated that 15 per cent of all male employees are exposed to "strong shaking, vibrations". Thus, concludes the report, "vibration is a widespread problem and affects many trades". At the same time the Government indicates that "as of today the labour inspection has not adopted a formal position on the use of the above-mentioned Norwegian standards concerning vibrations physically affecting people, but they will naturally fulfil a guide-line role in any cases submitted". (Endnote 135)

426. In other countries, criteria and exposure limits to vibration are incorporated in the legislation and serve to determine the obligations of undertakings particularly as concerns the application of protective measures. In Argentina, for example, the law stipulates that no worker can be exposed to vibrations exceeding the established maximum permissible values, and if these values are exceeded necessary corrective measures should be taken to reduce them. (Endnote 136)

427. In Chile protection is provided against vibrations in the range of frequency between 1 and 1,000 Hz, and different permissible levels of such vibrations are fixed for the hands, for the whole body and for the spine and head. (Endnote 137)

428. The situation would appear to be better as concerns setting criteria and exposure limits for noise, which have been established in a greater number of countries. Still the differences encountered from country to country are no less considerable. In some countries the legislation simply prescribes the maximum permissible sound level in conditions that may be taken to provide criteria only in a very general sense. This is the case, for example, in Ecuador where such levels are established at 85 dB(A) for the environment in which a worker normally holds his head, and at 70 dB(A) for offices and workplaces intended primarily for intellectual work. (Endnote 138) In comparison, the same exposure limits are laid down in Colombia where the legislation also prescribes detailed measures for evaluating and measuring noise, and the criteria of exposure are set out in a special technical standard -- "Basic norm on occupational noise." (Endnote 139)

429. In some countries the problem of occupational noise is approached in a narrower context. In Spain the General Ordinance on the Safety and Hygiene at Work does not establish criteria and exposure limits to noise, but indicates the noise level at which personal protective equipment should be used. Certain criteria and measurements are nevertheless laid down in respect of hearing protectors. (Endnote 140) As the Government indicated in its report, the chapter on noise and vibrations of the General Ordinance is at present being revised, taking account of the new EEC Directive on Noise mentioned above. The report also mentioned a recent publication of the Spanish Technical Standard on Vibrations and Shocks (PNE 97 001 82).

430. Criteria and statutory exposure limits to noise are prescribed in the legislation of a number of countries. (Endnote 141) The technical content of these provisions and standards concerning, for example, types and sources of noise covered, is of course very unequal. Less common are national standards that establish criteria and exposure limits, for instance, to ultrasound and infrasound. (Endnote 142)

431. In the socialist countries which are members of the CMEA, criteria of evaluating exposure hazards, different measurement techniques, and exposure limits prescribed on that basis for different types of noise and vibrations, are spelled out in detail in the binding national safety standards dealing with those hazards (Endnote 143) and through the common CMEA safety standards. (Endnote 144) These standards establish both general safety requirements as regards occupational exposure to noise and vibration and specific requirements for a large range of particular activities, processes, equipment, etc. In some of the above-mentioned countries, as is the case in the USSR, a number of rules and norms dealing with exposure to noise and vibration are also issued by state sanitary control bodies. (Endnote 145)

432. The Government of Romania stated in its report that protective measures concerning air pollution, noise and vibration are laid down in Republican Standards on Occupational Safety, which establish criteria and maximum exposure limits to heat (radiations caloriques), noise and vibration.

433. The only relevant piece of legislation mentioned in the report by the Government of China is the national "Standards of Noise Health for Industrial Undertakings" of 1979, which were issued in the form of regulations to enterprises and organisations all over the country and, according to the Government's report, have achieved good results in decreasing noise.

434. Exposure limits to noise and measures against vibrations which are laid down in generally applicable legislation, are sometimes included, with the necessary modifications, in regulations concerning particular branches of industry (most often in the mining and construction industries). (Endnote 146) In the United States, permissible noise levels for exposure are established for industry in general and for the construction industry. (Endnote 147) In the socialist countries general regulations and standards are supplemented by branch of industry regulations and safety rules. In some countries, while no statutory exposure limits to noise of general application are prescribed, there are specific statutory requirements establishing such limits in respect of particular occupations or installations. In the United Kingdom, for example, the Agriculture (Tractor Cabs) Regulations, 1974, as amended in 1984, stipulate that noise levels inside safety cabs fitted to tractors must not be more than 90 dB(A). In Greece statutory exposure limits to noise have been laid down in respect of work in mines and quarries. (Endnote 148)

435. As is the case for air pollution, national criteria and exposure limits to noise may have a non-binding recommendatory character, but be used in interpreting the general requirements of the legislation. In the United Kingdom this applies to the Code of Practice for reducing the exposure of employed persons to noise. The Norwegian Anti-Noise Association has issued a guide-line entitled "Away with Noise".

436. In India the Government's report states that Model Rules on operations involving high noise levels have been made for adoption by the state governments in their State Factory Rules, and prescribe engineering control or administrative measures to be taken so that workers are not exposed to sound levels exceeding the levels prescribed for a specific exposure time. No rules have been framed on vibration. As regards mines, noise levels are recommended by the General Directorate of Mines Safety based on the ILO Code of Practice.

437. In Norway all regulations containing exposure limits and protective measures against noise are taken by the labour inspectorate, on the board of which the central organisations of employers and workers are represented, and applied as administrative norms. The principal instrument in this respect is the Labour Inspection circular No. 398 of 1982, "Noise at the workplace -- Regulations with comments". Guide-lines have also been issued for the control of sound conditions at the workplace (Circular No. 421) and on noise data for machines and equipment (No. 422). (Endnote 149)

438. As indicated above, standards on air pollution passed through stages of being merely recommendatory in character, or being enforced through administrative decisions, before becoming compulsory. A similar evolution can be discerned for standards on noise and vibrations.

439. While technical exposure standards established in Portugal are not binding in general, such standards for noise and vibration have been made obligatory. (Endnote 150) These standards are generally based on the recommendations contained in the relevant international ISO standards. Portuguese norms are established by the tripartite Portuguese Technical Standards Committee. It is interesting to note that the legislation expressly provides for representatives of the occupational organisations on another tripartite body concerned, the Permanent Committee for the Revision of the List of Occupational Diseases, to be chosen from among technically competent persons. (Endnote 151) Moreover, the members of the National Council on Occupational Safety and Health, which advises the Government on general policy measures, may be consulted by the technical specialists. (Endnote 152)

440. In Sweden the basic Directives on noise and infrasound and ultrasound at work (Nos. 110 and 110:1) issued by the National Board of Occupational Safety and Health (NBOSH), are being revised and will be re-issued in the form of regulations under the Work Environment Act. These Directives refer to criteria of assessment of hearing impairment risks established in the Swedish Standard SEN 590111 "Assessment of Hearing Impairment Risks Entailed by Exposure to Noise" compiled by the Swedish National Committee of the International Electro-technical Commission, and approved by the Swedish Standards Association. A number of other Directives have been issued by the NBOSH for protection against noise and vibrations in particular operations and types of machinery. Work is in progress also on the compilation of regulations containing safety rules and limit values concerning the exposure of workers to vibrations. In its last Article 22 Report on Convention No. 148 the Government indicated that the draft Ordinance on hand-tool vibrations had been finalised.

441. In the majority of the countries examined which have established exposure limits to noise, the maximum permissible level of continuous exposure for an 8-hour working day is established at 85 dB(A) which corresponds to the "warning limit value" recommended by the ILO and other international bodies. This limit is also prescribed by the EEC Directive on Noise (article 4). In some countries, for example in the United States, the maximum exposure level is fixed higher -- at 90 dB(A) -- which corresponds to the ILO's "danger limit value" -- but the 85 db(A) level is taken as the "action level" at which the employer shall administer a hearing conservation programme. (Endnote 153)

442. The Committee of Experts draws particular attention to the fact that in a number of countries the standards set permit exposure of workers, be it only for very brief periods, to a noise level of 115 db(A). In Brazil, for example, such exposure is permitted for a period of 7 minutes, (Endnote 154) in Chile for 7.5 minutes, (Endnote 155) and in the United States and Egypt for 15 minutes or less. (Endnote 156) The Committee recalls that the recommendations of the ILO Code of Practice on the Protection of Workers against Noise and Vibration in the Working Environment do not allow any exposure to a noise level of 115 db(A), no matter for how short a time, without appropriate ear protection.

D. Preventive and protective measures

443. A variety of measures exist to cope with the harmful effects of atmospheric pollution, noise and vibration. These measures are aimed either at combating the hazard itself or at making those concerned more aware of its presence and of the need for precautions. Preventive and protective measures aimed at combating hazards in the working environment are comprised of administrative measures, technical measures of protection, and organisational measures and personal protective equipment.

444. The administrative measures in question consist essentially of a determination by the competent authority of the processes, substances, machinery and equipment which involve exposure of workers to occupational hazards in the working environment due to air pollution, noise and vibration, and applying appropriate restrictions to their manufacture, supply and use.

445. With regard to the other measures of prevention and protection outlined in Convention No. 148, two basic ideas were put forward by the competent Conference Committee, as explained in its report: "that of the prevention of occupational hazards and that of personal protection. The prevention of hazards was dealt with in Article 9, a distinction being made between technical measures and supplementary organisational measures. Personal protective measures, dealt with in Article 10, had been reinforced by prohibiting employers from obliging workers to work without protective equipment when the latter was necessary". (Endnote 157) The approach taken by the Convention to the prevention of occupational hazards thus reflects the idea of collective prevention as well as of individual protection.

446. These measures for improvement of the quality of the working environment are generally supplemented by measures aimed at the information and training of workers and at the promotion of research activities in the field of occupational safety and health, which are dealt with in Chapter III of this survey.

I. Administrative measures

447. In many countries the use of dangerous substances and processes is regulated by administrative measures to be taken by the competent authority, with special powers vested in it to that end. This practice is reflected in Article 12 of Convention No. 148 which stipulates: "The use of processes, substances, machinery and equipment, to be specified by the competent authority, which involve exposure of workers to occupational hazards in the working environment due to air pollution, noise or vibration, shall be notified to the competent authority and the competent authority, as appropriate, may authorise the use on prescribed conditions or prohibit it." In respect of dangerous substances causing air pollution this provision is extended in Paragraph 7 of Recommendation No. 156, according to which "the competent authority should determine the substances of which the manufacture, supply or use in the working environment should be prohibited or made subject to its specific authorisation, requiring compliance with particular measures of prevention or protection".

448. The administrative measures giving effect to these provisions may be generally subdivided into prohibitions and restrictions on the use of such substances and processes. These measures constitute an essential element of a coherent national policy on occupational safety and health and the working environment. (Endnote 158)

449. The international regulation of the use of dangerous substances started with the adoption at Berne in 1906 of the International Convention on the Prohibition of the Use of White Phosphorus in the Manufacture of Matches. At its First Session in 1919 the International Labour Conference adopted the White Phosphorus Recommendation (No. 6), in which it called upon member States to adhere to this International Convention.

450. One of the first ILO Conventions -- the White Lead (Painting) Convention, 1921 (No. 13) -- prohibited the use of white lead and sulphate of lead and of all products containing these pigments in the internal painting of buildings, subject to certain exceptions (Articles 1 and 2).

451. Since that time, the ILO has assumed a leading role in establishing international standards regulating occupational exposure of workers to certain dangerous substances.

452. As concerns further prohibitions it may be useful to recall other more recent ILO Conventions dealing with particular risks, i.e. instruments concerning benzene, occupational cancer and asbestos mentioned above.

453. Measures imposing restrictions consist generally of notification of use to the competent authority, obtaining permission for use from the competent authority, and imposition of special conditions for use. These measures may be included in national legislation separately or in different combinations. For certain particularly dangerous substances or processes all three of these requirements may be used simultaneously.

454. An example of the cumulative use of these measures is found in the recent Asbestos Convention No. 162, which requires notification by employers to the competent authority, in a manner and to the extent prescribed by it, of certain types of work with asbestos (Article 13), as well as the laying down of special rules and procedures, including authorisation, for the use of asbestos (Article 9(b)). It may be noted that the EEC Directive concerning protection of workers from asbestos (Endnote 159) provides that any activity likely to involve a risk of exposure to asbestos dust must be notified in advance to the authorities, and asbestos spraying should be prohibited.

455. The notification of the use of certain processes, etc., involving health hazards to be specified by the competent authority, is a measure essential to close surveillance and control and to the laying down of suitable protective measures. In practice the requirement to notify the relevant authorities before using certain dangerous processes may or may not be accompanied by provisions requiring that these processes should only be used after obtaining permission from the authorities concerned. In cases where such permission is not expressly required, the law generally leaves open the possibility for the competent authority to intervene if it thinks it necessary. Where formal permission must be obtained, it is usually subject to such conditions as the competent authority may impose. In the last case conditions and restrictions may be imposed either through direct permits for use or through systems of licensing establishments which may be classified as dangerous or unhealthy by reason of using, for example, certain types of substances.

456. When speaking of administrative measures of protection against air pollution, noise and vibration, it should be recalled, as appears from the previous sections of the survey, that the safety and health legislation of most countries (and consequently the administrative measures laid down) are considerably more developed in respect of protection against air pollution and the use of dangerous substances than for protection against noise and vibration. In case of the latter hazards the administrative measures of protection outlined above are in general only beginning to be established in legislation and implemented in practice. For vibration in particular, such measures are being considered only in a few of the countries where this hazard is already covered by relevant safety standards.

457. As concerns air pollution, the situation is quite different. In a great number of countries very strict and elaborate administrative procedures are established, for example, for the notification and obtaining permits for use of radioactive substances and agents, their use quite often being administered by special government agencies. Corresponding developments also may be observed in an increasing number of countries as concerns air pollution by dangerous chemicals.

458. As was pointed out previously in the survey, in many countries laws and regulations governing dangerous substances, such as poisons, explosives, petroleum spirits, agricultural pesticides, ingredients of food and other consumer products, etc., form a separate body of legislation which aims at protecting the wider public, including consumers and the external environment, and not only workers and the working environment. For the most part, therefore, the analysis of this legislation will fall outside the scope of the present survey, which is concerned primarily with studying those measures of protection in respect of substances and processes that are introduced in occupational safety and health legislation of the member States.

459. At the same time the Committee has taken into account a tendency in some countries for the general legislation on dangerous substances to be made applicable to such substances whenever they occur. When this is superimposed on the occupational safety and health regulations on the same subject, the analysis of this combined legislation becomes an extremely complicated matter. To illustrate these developments reference may be made to the structure of such legislation in the Federal Republic of Germany where the Order on Dangerous Substances in the Workplace is subsidiary to the Chemicals Act, to the Industrial Code and to other principal Acts. (Endnote 160)

460. Nevertheless, some general observations on the different approaches taken may be made on the basis of the available legislation and the very scarse information provided by governments in their reports.

461. First of all, it should be pointed out that some prohibitions and restrictions in the use of certain dangerous substances and processes are found in the legislation of a great number of countries, whether this be only a single substance prohibited in a defined process, or a whole list of different substances in various industrial uses. In many countries these measures have been introduced under the general provisions enabling the competent authorities to regulate the manufacture, trade and use of dangerous substances, processes, etc., which in many cases expressly assigns to these authorities the power to prohibit or restrict their use on health and safety grounds. (Endnote 161)

462. An example of comprehensive general provisions to that effect is provided by the Swedish Working Environment Act, under which the Government or, by authority of the Government, the National Board of Occupational Safety and Health (NBOSH), may prohibit the use of a work process, working method or device or a substance, if such a prohibition is considered of particular importance in the interest of safety. The Government may also prescribe that a work process, working method or facilities intended for a particular kind of activity may not be used without permission, and that a device or a substance may only be used after prior approval, which may be subject to prescribed conditions, including control testing and continuous inspection of the conditions of their use. (Endnote 162) It is interesting to note here that NBOSH is a tripartite body and thus workers' and employers' organisations become directly involved in the elaboration of, among others, the administrative measures of protection contained in the regulations adopted by it.

463. In other countries the legislation on occupational safety and health confers no general powers on the competent authorities to prohibit or restrict the use of dangerous substances, processes, etc., and such measures may result from the general duty of the employer to provide a healthy working environment. (Endnote 163)

464. Close administrative control over the use of dangerous substances, processes, etc., is exercised in many countries under the provisions requiring previous authorisation by the competent authorities for putting into operation any newly built or modified industrial unit, process, technology, etc. The procedures established under this system usually provide for the obligation of the undertaking to notify the labour inspection of any changes in technological processes, so that the labour inspectorate can make preliminary inspections and tests and issue operation permit subject to application of any special conditions that may be imposed by the inspectorate to ensure the health and safety of workers. Coupled with the general powers of labour inspectors to prohibit any activity that may present grave danger to the life and health of workers, this system of administrative control plays an important role in protecting workers against air pollution, noise and vibration. As one government pointed out in its report, due to such arrangements the labour inspectorate has an insight into working conditions and can prevent work during which workers would be endangered by exposure to these risks. (Endnote 164) In the socialist countries the effectiveness of this system is further reinforced by the direct participation of trade unions which have to give their approval to the issuance of a permit to operate (Endnote 165) and have the right jointly with the competent government authorities to prohibit the use of specified materials or technical processes on account of their danger, or to make their use conditional upon the observance of specified conditions. (Endnote 166)

465. In Democratic Yemen, for example, under this system the permit to operate for any establishment is delivered by the occupational safety and health authorities and approved by the Trades Union Confederation. (Endnote 167)

466. A system of administrative control closely resembling the one explained above exists in a number of countries, particularly in most Western European countries, in respect of establishments classified as dangerous, dirty or noxious.

467. In Belgium, Greece, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, for example, it is provided in the laws governing such establishments that the health and safety of workers should be considered in deciding upon permits to operate, and substances referred to in the list of such establishments may be used only after approval by the appropriate authority.

468. Administrative measures established in some developed countries may be very extensive. In Denmark, for example, the approval of the Minister of Environment is required for the manufacture and trade of about 1,400 listed dangerous substances and compounds, approval from the labour inspectorate is necessary for the use of polyurethane and epoxy products, pest and weed control agents, previous notification of the Inspectorate is obligatory in respect of any new chemical substances, asbestos and products containing it, etc. Direct prohibition of use imposed by the legislation relates only to crocidolite and other asbestos products, except for specified uses, and solders containing more than 0.1 per cent cadmium.

469. The example of Denmark is characteristic in the sense that it reflects the approach taken by the majority of the developed countries, where emphasis is laid more on various measures of administrative control of the use of dangerous substances, processes, etc., than on such exceptional measures as total prohibition of their use. In some countries, for example, in the United States, while very strict regulations exist in respect of a number of dangerous substances, none of them seems to be prohibited from use.

470. In fact, an analysis of the legislation of the reporting countries shows that substances commonly identified as requiring prohibition are very few and include mostly those already covered by existing international standards, for example:

-- white phosphorus in matches;

-- white lead and other lead substances, most often for use in paints for interior painting or painting of ships;

-- benzene and products containing benzene, especially used as solvents or in cleaning;

-- crocidolite and some other asbestos products, asbestos spraying and painting, use of asbestos for insulation, cladding or decoration and in some other uses;

-- arsenic and its compounds in certain uses.

471. While noting the obvious influence that international standards have exercised on national legislation, it should be noted also that only in very few countries does the legislation include prohibitions in respect of all of these substances.

472. Some examples, nevertheless, may be given of countries which adopted restrictions taking into account the diversity of substances prohibited under statutory provisions and the methods used for applying such prohibitions.

473. In the Federal Republic of Germany the Order on Dangerous Substances in the Workplace mentioned above prohibits the use of various substances and processes in which they are used, including various carcinogenic substances. Provisions are also found in the regulations on pesticides, listing prohibited and restricted use of certain pesticides, in the technical rules concerning dangerous substances in the workplace, and in some accident prevention regulations issued by the Central Organisation of Industrial Employers' Associations (for example, prohibiting certain asbestos uses).

474. In other countries the regulations on the use of dangerous substances and processes consist of separate specific laws which are not within any kind of a framework legislation, making the situation very complex. To some extent this situation is characteristic of the Italian legislation, where some prohibitions on the use of certain substances are introduced through specific legislation and some through collective agreements. There are two laws which contain such prohibitions, concerning respectively white lead in paint and the use of benzol and its homologues in work processes, (Endnote 168) and further applied by a ministerial decree. In addition to the legislation, the National Collective Agreement of the Chemical Industry (March 1983) prohibits manufacturing processes in which the concentration of noxious substances exceeds the upper limits established by the ACGIH. This agreement also lists certain carcinogenic substances which should not come into contact with workers at all.

475. As a general conclusion, the administrative measures of control over the use of dangerous agents in the working environment due to air pollution, noise and vibration are still of a very fragmentary and piecemeal character, and require considerable development in the light of national conditions and the corresponding provisions of the ILO instruments on the working environment. This conclusion appears to be true both as regards developed and developing countries, for countries which have adopted general provisions for the administrative control of the use of dangerous substances and processes but which sometimes have not adopted subsidiary measures of application and for countries where such control is exercised through special legislation without any framework provisions or through collective agreements.

476. Quite often national legislation contains enactments standing alone or particular provisions that prohibit, for example, the use of lead in painting (Endnote 169) or white phosphorus in matches. (Endnote 170) They may require previous notification of the use of certain dangerous substances (Endnote 171) or processes capable of provoking occupational diseases caused by dangerous substances (Endnote 172) or, in a more general sense, of any construction, putting into service or modification of industrial buildings and plant, (Endnote 173) and of any substances used in undertaking and of any new production technique to be introduced. (Endnote 174)

477. Previous authorisation of the competent authority may be required in other more risky cases as, for example, the use of listed carcinogenic substances, (Endnote 175) acquisition and use of radioactive substances or apparatus. (Endnote 176) Approval of the competent authority is sometimes required for plans of construction and installations in respect of noise and vibration hazards. (Endnote 177) The use of a number of dangerous substances, particularly carcinogens, is permitted in many countries only in closed systems.

478. The above examples only illustrate the variety of situations dealt with by measures of prohibition, notification, previous approval or authorisation on the part of the competent authorities, as reflected in national legislation.

II. Technical measures

479. The effective application of exposure limits depends largely upon the technical means of protection. Moreover, as operational exposure limits do not always coincide with health-based levels and some of them still carry a significant risk, it is necessary that every effort should be made at the workplace to reduce the actual exposure as far as possible below the numerical value of the exposure limit. It is generally agreed that among the measures to be taken, priority should be given to technical preventive measures, and only when these cannot be applied should other protective methods (for example, reduction of exposure time or use of personal protective equipment) be used. As was pointed out in the law and practice report prepared by the Office for these instruments, "unfortunately, in many cases the results obtained by general technical prevention are inadequate, making it necessary to resort to individual means of protection ... Furthermore, recourse is often had to administrative measures such as the reduction of exposure time, increased leave, shift rotation, etc. It must be clearly emphasised that while these administrative measures may be indispensable in some special cases where technical prevention is as yet ineffective, they should in principle be considered strictly as transitional measures since their effectiveness is highly debatable". (Endnote 178) This view was further emphasised by the Meeting of Experts on Policies for the Establishment of Occupational Exposure Limits to Chemical Substances in the Working Environment, which stated that Article 9 may be regarded as a key provision of Convention No. 148, as it sets out the objective to be achieved. (Endnote 179) This Article provides that, as far as possible, the working environment should be kept free from any hazard due to air pollution, noise or vibration, by technical measures applied to new plant or processes in design or installation, or added to existing plant or process; or where this is not possible, by supplementary organisational measures.

480. All measures that may be used for the purpose of applying this Article can be regarded as being broadly covered by the expressions "technical" and "organisational". No further precision was thought advisable concerning the definition of these measures because of the danger that any kind of enumeration will be incomplete and raise problems of definition that often have the effect of being restrictive.

481. Technical measures of protection in terms of the Convention cover an extremely wide range of engineering methods, from the design stage of machinery or technological processes to the neutralisation of a given hazard at its source in existing plant or processes.

482. The most commonly used technical measures against air pollution recommended in the ILO Code of Practice on occupational exposure to airborne substances harmful to health consist in, for example, the use of harmless or less harmful substitute materials and processes in place of dangerous substances and processes, carrying out the dangerous processes in an enclosed system, isolating dangerous operations from the remainder of the working premises, automatic handling of harmful substances or the use of remote control systems, and local exhaust ventilation. Some of these measures, like the use of enclosed systems, are expressly referred to in certain Conventions and Recommendations concerning particular occupational hazards.

483. As regards technical measures against noise and vibration, apart from the provisions included in different ILO Codes of Practice, special mention may be made of the provisions of the Hygiene (Commerce and Offices) Recommendation, 1964 (No. 120) and of the Crew Accommodation (Noise Control) Recommendation, 1970 (No. 141). The recommended measures are usually concerned with design, installation and isolation of machinery and equipment producing harmful noise or vibration.

484. Among the technical measures generally referred to in Convention No. 148, particular attention is drawn in Recommendation No. 156 to the monitoring of the working environment, fixing emission levels of machinery and installations, and replacement of dangerous substances and processes.

485. Provisions concerning monitoring of air pollution, noise and vibration in the working environment are included in Paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of Recommendation No. 156. These provisions suggest that the competent authority should prescribe the nature, frequency and other conditions of monitoring to be carried out on the employer's responsibility. Special monitoring in relation to the exposure limits referred to in Article 8 of Convention No. 148 should be undertaken when machinery or installations are first put into use or significantly modified, or when new processes are introduced. The Recommendation further specifies that it should be the duty of the employer to arrange for monitoring equipment to be regularly inspected, maintained and calibrated. The workers and/or their representatives and the inspection services should be afforded access to the records of the monitoring of the working environment and to the records of inspection, maintenance and calibration of the apparatus and equipment used therefor.

486. The role of the competent authority in organising appropriate monitoring of the working environment is particularly emphasised in the Recommendation. Although it would seem easier to adapt monitoring procedures to the different and sometimes changing situations in undertakings if the application of this provision were made suitably flexible by, for example, leaving the employer free to organise the monitoring in whatever way he deems fit, this might result in monitoring being haphazard and sometimes even inappropriate, with similar situations being monitored differently and the degree of hazard possibly being underestimated. Therefore, it is important that wherever monitoring is being organised, it should be done according to common rules and procedures prescribed for that purpose by the competent authority. At the same time, the Recommendation gives full latitude to the competent authority as to the conditions under which monitoring is to be effected.

487. Although Recommendation No. 156 was the first ILO instrument to lay down detailed provisions on the general monitoring of the working environment in respect of air pollution, noise and vibration, some provisions on this subject are found in other international labour standards on occupational safety and health, in particular in the Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115) (Article 11); the Benzene Convention, 1971 (No. 136) (Article 6, paragraph 3); the Occupational Cancer Recommendation, 1974 (No. 147) (Paragraph 4(3)). The Asbestos Convention (No. 162) and Recommendation (No. 172) include special parts which deal with surveillance of the working environment and workers' health. Finally, assessment and surveillance of the risks from health hazards in the workplace are included among the functions of the occupational health services under Article 5(a) and (b) of the Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161).

488. Further guidance on control and monitoring is found in the relevant ILO Codes of Practice and in standards established by other competent bodies, particularly the International Standards Organisation, referred to earlier in the survey. It may be observed from the above that the question of appropriate monitoring of the working environment has received increasing attention in the framework of international labour standards as an essential element of controlling the quality of the working environment and implementing other protective measures. The importance attached to proper monitoring of the working environment was further emphasised by the Meeting of Experts on Policies for the Establishment of Occupational Exposure Limits to Chemical Substances in the Working Environment, which recommended that "the ILO should consider developing guide-lines for good monitoring practice in co-operation with international organisations concerned", and that "there was a great need for providing developing countries with simple methods of environmental measurement". (Endnote 180)

489. While noting that more guidance is needed on the monitoring of air pollution, noise and vibration to help those concerned, particularly the developing countries, to meet the relevant provisions of Recommendation No. 156, the Committee of Experts welcomes the above-mentioned proposals concerning future ILO action in this respect and considers that analogous measures should be taken in due time to strengthen the ILO capacity to advise on good monitoring practice in respect of noise and vibration as well.

490. Paragraphs 8, 9, 10 and 11 of Recommendation No. 156 contain provisions concerning standards for the emission levels of machinery and installations as regards air pollution, noise and vibration. Such standards should be approved by the competent authority in appropriate cases and should be attained as appropriate by design, or built-in devices, or technical measures during installation. An obligation to ensure compliance with these standards should be placed on the manufacturer or the supplier of the machinery or installations. If, in the light of the most recent knowledge, the machinery and installations cannot meet the approved standards for the emission levels, their manufacture, supply or use, where necessary, should be made subject to authorisation by the competent authority requiring compliance with other appropriate technical or administrative protective measures. It is specified that these provisions of the Recommendation should not relieve the employer of his responsibility for compliance with the measures required in pursuance of Article 6 of Convention No. 148. Finally, the Recommendation provides that the employer should ensure the regular inspection and maintenance of machines and installations, with respect to the emission of harmful substances, dust, noise and vibration.

491. The question of controlling emission levels of machinery and installations is closely related to monitoring of the working environment. In prescribing the conditions of monitoring, the competent authority should be able to take into account the emission levels of machinery and installations used, these levels being defined by the technical specifications for the type of machinery or installation in question. For both methods of protection to function effectively the competent authority should approve standards for the emission levels, if it has not set them itself, and should make subject to its authorisation the manufacture, supply or use of machinery and installations that do not meet the standards set.

492. While the competent authority has responsibilities in implementing both measures of protection, there is a profound difference between them as to the obligation of compliance. If the proper monitoring of the working environment is the obligation of the employer, it is the manufacturer or the supplier of the machinery or installations who should ensure their compliance with the approved standards for emission levels. As was indicated in the report of the Conference Committee when it discussed the adoption of Convention No. 148, "it was felt that there was an obligation to be shared by the designer, the manufacturer, the importer or seller, and the installer and it was finally decided that the responsibility should be placed on the manufacturer or the supplier of the machinery". (Endnote 181) What is also involved here is a principle intended to serve as a guide-line in the design of machinery and installations so that they can be operated in such a way as to conform to the technical standards for such machinery. By making the manufacturer or supplier responsible for compliance with these standards, the provision virtually poses the problem from the actual design stage of the machinery and serves as an incentive to those responsible for research to find technical solutions that are compatible with the relevant standards. Here, a similarity of approach is apparent between Recommendation No. 156 and the instruments on the guarding of machinery dealt with in the first part of this survey.

493. While introducing the new idea of limiting harmful emissions of machinery and installations, at the same time it is recognised in the Recommendation that the practical implementation of the measures imposing new standards on the emission levels of machinery and installations may give rise to substantial difficulties. The required changes in method of construction of machinery and equipment would often entail considerable expenditure and take some time. With that in mind, different approaches are taken by the Recommendation in respect of newly manufactured machinery and equipment, and of existing machinery and equipment. As laid down in Paragraph 28, in respect of the former, provisions of the Recommendation which relate to the design, manufacture and supply of machinery and equipment to an approved standard should apply forthwith; whereas in respect of the latter, the competent authority should, as soon as possible, specify time limits for the modifications required.

494. Measures aimed at replacement of dangerous substances and processes are suggested in Paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Recommendation. According to Paragraph 5, substances which are harmful to health or otherwise dangerous and which are liable to be airborne in the working environment should, as far as possible, be replaced by less harmful or harmless substances. The same applies to processes involving air pollution, noise or vibration which should be replaced as far as possible by processes involving less or no air pollution, noise or vibration.

495. It should be noted that replacement of certain dangerous substances by harmless or less harmful substitute products in the working environment and the use of alternative technology is required by other ILO Conventions. At present such requirements are included in the above-mentioned instruments on benzene, occupational cancer, and asbestos, as well as in the Hygiene (Commerce and Offices) Recommendation, 1964 (No. 120) which recommends that the competent authority should encourage and advise on such measures of substitution.

496. There is not a single country in which, where occupational safety and health legislation exists, there are not some general or specific provisions referring to some kind of technical measures to be taken in order to keep the working environment free from occupational hazards. The extent of the measures prescribed depends, however, on the overall economic and technical development of the country concerned, and on the corresponding development of its occupational safety and health policy and institutions. It would be unrealistic therefore to expect to find comprehensive regulations to that effect apart from a few highly developed countries. This is particularly evident when considering such elaborate technical measures as establishing standards for the emission levels of machinery and installations. Such measures are only envisaged in some developed countries. The Austrian Government, for example, indicated that an ordinance on the measurement of sound levels and the frequency analysis of machines and devices is being prepared by the Federal Ministry for Trade, Commerce and Industry. (Endnote 182)

497. In countries where noise and vibration are not yet expressly recognised in the legislation as specific occupational risks, requiring prescribed protective measures, such measures could be nevertheless taken in practice to protect exposed workers, for example, through appropriate actions on the part of the labour inspectorate, as is mostly the case.

498. In other countries some isolated provisions concerning technical measures to be taken may be found in the legislation providing, for example, that where machinery and equipment produce high vibration and noise they should be installed so as to avoid dangerous vibrations (Endnote 183) or on shock-absorbing platforms (Endnote 184) or on isolated platforms. (Endnote 185)

499. In countries where protection against noise and vibration forms a separate area of the occupational safety and health legislation, the technical measures prescribed are on the contrary quite extensive, particularly as concerns protection against noise. (Endnote 186) Apart from the measures mentioned above, the legislation of Colombia, for example, stipulates that, where possible, equipment producing vibrations should not be used, and that its design should be improved to reduce vibration. Various special measures are also prescribed for particular types of machinery producing vibrations, such as circuits of forced circulation, pneumatic tools, etc. (Endnote 187) As concerns noise, all undertakings producing noise are required to carry out technical studies in order to introduce systems and methods of work reducing it to a maximum, attaching particular attention to old or defective machinery, replacing metallic gears with gears made from other less noisy materials, etc. Special studies are required where noise levels exceed the prescribed permissible maximum of 85 dB(A). (Endnote 188) In these countries the legislation sometimes spells out the concept behind the protection measures to be applied. In Argentina, for instance, engineering control measures should be applied to the source of noise, to the ways it is propagated and to the areas which it affects; in the second place, individual measures for the hearing protection of a worker should be used; and in the third place, reduction of the time of exposure should be envisaged, if previous measures have proved to be insufficient. (Endnote 189)

500. The Committee of Experts has always closely monitored the situation in the ratifying countries as regards technical measures of protection against noise and vibration, requesting them to report any progress achieved, particularly as regards technical measures to test new equipment or machinery when it is designed or marketed with a view to eliminating as far as possible the risks caused by such hazards. (Endnote 190)

501. As regards technical measures of protection against air pollution, they occupy considerably more place in the occupational safety legislation of most countries, even of the least developed among them, as there is now hardly any country where provision has not been made for adequate ventilation of working premises and evacuation of dangerous dust and fumes. (Endnote 191) There is, however, a vast technical and technological gap between these basic provisions for preventing air pollution and the whole arsenal of more developed measures in certain countries providing for, to give but a few examples, local extract ventilation systems and general mechanical ventilation, (Endnote 192) checking of such systems for efficiency before use, separation or replacement of harmful substances and processes, general monitoring of the working environment (Endnote 193) and monitoring of particular substances, (Endnote 194) specific protective measures for particular substances (Endnote 195) and for operations entailing particular risks. (Endnote 196)

502. In its comments under Article 9 of the Convention, the Committee of Experts has invariably pointed to the need to enlarge the range of protective measures prescribed through legislation or by any other method in conformity with national practice and conditions, with a view to giving full effect to the requirements of the Convention both as regards new plant or processes and for those already in existence. (Endnote 197)

III. Organisational measures and personal protective equipment

503. Technical measures of protection against air pollution, noise and vibration obviously are not the only means available to ensure protection of workers, particularly in situations where their application is limited for technological or other reasons. In these cases additional protective measures are required which consist of introducing special systems of work organisation and the use of individual means of protection.

(a) Measures regarding work organisation

504. Article 9 of Convention No. 148 provides for the use of "supplementary organisational measures" where the use of appropriate technical measures is not sufficient to keep the working environment free from any hazard due to air pollution, noise and vibration. Such organisational measures are specified in Paragraph 13 of Recommendation No. 156, according to which "the competent authority should, as appropriate, provide for or promote, in consultation with employers' and workers' organisations, the reduction of exposure through suitable systems or schedules of work organisation, including the reduction of working time without loss of pay".

505. The organisational measures provided for in the instruments should be aimed at the reduction of the number of workers exposed, the duration and the degree of such exposure to the minimum compatible with safety, and may comprise, for example, the following, which are compiled from various ILO Codes of Practice and other ILO publications:

-- limiting the number of persons exposed;

-- rotation of jobs;

-- reorganisation of work, so that part of the work can be done without exposure to risks, for example, by setting up varied work teams;

-- the laying down of statutory rest breaks by virtue of a suitable reorganisation of work;

-- limiting the time of exposure by, for example, establishing a limit on the total time of exposure during a shift;

-- limiting access to premises where hazards are present;

-- requirements concerning qualifications of, or ability of, people exposed;

-- restricting unsupervised work or providing for special supervision of work with dangerous substances;

-- posting of warning notices;

-- prohibiting or limiting employment of particularly sensitive groups of workers (mainly young workers and female workers) on certain jobs involving exposure to air pollution, noise or vibration, etc.

506. In many countries provisions exist for setting shorter hours of work, longer rest periods and additional rest breaks for workers employed on types of work involving special dangers to their health. In some countries such enabling provisions still require implementation through specific legislation. (Endnote 198)

507. In Argentina, for example, working hours in unhealthy occupations may be reduced to six hours daily or 36 in a week, such occupations being determined by different decrees and including work exposing employees to various dangerous substances and to noise. (Endnote 199) In Colombia, in work involving vibration and noise, supplementary protection measures include special selection and training of personnel and the reduction of working time and rotation of workers. (Endnote 200) In Poland, besides technical measures, such other preventive activities are carried out as shortening of hours of work, introducing technological breaks (in forges 15-minute breaks every two hours on account of excessive noise), additional paid leave (6, 9 or 12 working days a year), payment of supplements for work in harmful, arduous or dangerous conditions, and providing meals with regenerative and preventive effects. (Endnote 201)

508. In supervising the application of the Convention, the Committee of Experts consistently draws attention to the question of improving and increasing the protection of workers by such supplementary organisational measures. (Endnote 202)

509. In general, such organisational measures of protection as are listed above have found wide use in the legislation and practice in countries where appropriate technical measures are also prescribed. However, they are very rarely found in the statutory provisions of those countries where technical measures of protection are also poorly developed.

(b) Provision and use of personal protective equipment

510. Technical and organisational measures of protection may be reinforced by the use of the individual means of protection. Article 10 of Convention No. 148 stipulates: "Where the measures taken in pursuance of Article 9 do not bring air pollution, noise and vibration in the working environment within the limits specified in pursuance of Article 8, the employer shall provide and maintain suitable personal protective equipment. The employer shall not require a worker to work without the personal protective equipment provided in pursuance of this Article."

511. Recommendation No. 156 further provides in Paragraph 12 that "the competent authority should, when necessary for the protection of the workers' health, establish a procedure for the approval of personal protective equipment". In adopting this provision the competent Conference Committee agreed that even where formal approval might not be required, it should be open to the competent authority to exercise supervision over the standards of personal protective equipment. (Endnote 203) The aim of this provision is to ensure that only such personal protective equipment as has been duly tested for efficiency according to a recognised method should be allowed in places of work.

512. As regards personal protective equipment against air pollution, the ILO Code of Practice on occupational exposure to airborne toxic substances harmful to health recommends (section 2.2.17) the use of appropriate respiratory protection and, if necessary, protective clothing, gloves, aprons, goggles, where a worker has to enter a contaminated atmosphere or where there is risk of contact with corrosive, radioactive or toxic substances.

513. Personal protective equipment against noise and vibration recommended by the ILO Code of Practice on protection of workers against noise and vibration in the working environment (sections 10.1.1 and 10.2.5) may consist of ear-plugs, ear-muffs, helmets and other specialised ear protectors, as well as of more complicated protection devices, such as soundproof booths and anti-vibration working platforms or stands.

514. The use of personal protective equipment is perhaps the one area where the legislation of the reporting countries shows the greatest uniformity of approach, as was already mentioned by the Committee in relation to the corresponding provisions of the instruments on the guarding of machinery. In virtually all of the reporting countries there are provisions requiring the supply of personal protective equipment to workers in case of exposure to occupational hazards and its proper maintenance and use by the persons concerned. (Endnote 204)

515. In many countries procedures have been established for the approval of the personal protective equipment by the competent authorities, as, for example, in Ecuador, where it must conform to the specifications issued by the Ecuadorian Standardisation Institute. (Endnote 205) Special national standards on different types of such equipment have been developed in a number of countries. (Endnote 206)

516. There are, however, still many countries where the corresponding provisions are limited to establishing only general obligations on employers to supply individual means of protection to workers where they are needed. In many countries the law specifies what equipment should be provided but covers only means of protection against inhalation of dangerous substances or their absorption through the skin. (Endnote 207) Less often it provides for protection against noise. (Endnote 208)

517. As regards individual means of protection against vibration, the Committee does not dispose of any examples from the information available where these means and equipment have been specified in the legislation. In supervising the application of Article 10 of the Convention in ratifying countries, the Committee has sometimes specifically inquired whether employers are required to provide personal protective equipment against vibration, and whether this equipment includes such items as double-layer gloves specially designed to prevent the transmission of vibrations through the hands, shoes with soles that absorb vibration transmitted by the ground, etc.

518. Clearly, as regards personal protective equipment against vibration, there is much scope for action and research to be done even in countries which otherwise have provided for various technical measures of combating this hazard. The ILO's facilities for conducting research in this area, and for collecting and disseminating information, should be more widely used by member States, as well as by the employers' and workers' organisations concerned. For the time being, not much has been done in this field, although reference may be made to the comprehensive bibliography on vibration compiled by the International Occupational Safety and Health Information Centre.

E. Supervision of the health of workers

519. The protection of workers' health and physical integrity is ensured mainly by technical measures for the elimination of hazards, but as long as these hazards do exist in the workplace suitable medical supervision of the workers is necessary. It is worth noting that the question of protection and supervision of the health of workers has long been one of the major preoccupations of the ILO, and is widely reflected in its standard-setting activity. A number of Conventions and Recommendations have been adopted over the years dealing with the question of medical supervision either in respect of particular categories of workers, or in connection with certain specific occupational risks. In 1985 the International Labour Conference adopted the Occupational Health Services Convention (No. 161) and Recommendation (No. 171), which constitute an important step in promoting further development of national systems of medical supervision of workers.

520. Supervision of the health of workers is also specifically provided for in Convention No. 148 and Recommendation No. 156 in respect of workers exposed to air pollution, noise and vibration. In the context of their provisions three basic questions concerning the systems of medical supervision are considered in this section of the survey: (a) medical examination of workers; (b) a system of medical records; and (c) the situation of workers whose continued employment is medically inadvisable.

I. Medical examination of workers

521. Medical examination of workers consists of examinations conducted by physicians, and of biological and other tests or investigations which are usually prescribed and carried out on the occasion of the examination by the physician. The ILO instruments on the working environment provide for three types of medical examinations: pre-assignment and periodic, and supervision after cessation of the assignment. A distinction should be made between the pre-assignment medical examination and pre-employment examinations, which is another type of medical supervision not specifically covered by these instruments. In fact, a draft amendment aimed at providing in the instruments for pre-employment examinations was not adopted by the competent Conference Committee. The difference, as explained in the Committee, consists essentially in the fact that the expression "pre-assignment examination" referred to "any medical examination that took place before a worker was assigned or transferred to a given workpost, and that the worker could be already in the employ of the undertaking. The text under discussion did not deal with the question whether he should or should not be given a pre-employment medical examination". (Endnote 209) In this context the role of the pre-assignment medical examination in providing a bench-mark necessary to evaluate the results of subsequent medical supervision was particularly stressed in the Committee.

522. Two other questions are directly related to medical examinations: the cost of examinations and tests, and whether they may be carried out during working hours.

523. Before examining the provisions of Convention No. 148 and Recommendation No. 156 in this connection, it should be pointed out that the question of medical examinations has been the subject of several other ILO instruments in the field of occupational safety and health, namely those already mentioned concerning benzene, occupational cancer and asbestos.

(a) Pre-assignment and periodic medical examinations

524. Article 11, paragraph 1, of Convention No. 148 stipulates: "There shall be supervision at suitable intervals, on conditions and in circumstances determined by the competent authority, of the health of workers exposed or liable to be exposed to occupational hazards due to air pollution, noise and vibration in the working environment. Such supervision shall include a pre-assignment medical examination and periodical examinations, as determined by the competent authority." This provision of the Convention is further developed in Paragraph 16(1) of Recommendation No. 156.

525. This Article establishes the principle of medical supervision of the workers concerned while allowing great flexibility in its implementation. It is in fact left to the competent authority to decide in which cases pre-assignment and periodical medical examinations should be carried out and to fix the methods and conditions under which they shall take place. Attention should be drawn, however, to the preventive aspect of this provision, which extends the medical supervision not only to the exposed workers but also to workers "liable to be exposed" to hazards concerned.

526. In the second subparagraph of Paragraph 16 of Recommendation No. 156 it is recommended that "the competent authority should require that the results of any such examinations or tests be made available to the worker, and at his request to his personal physician". In view of some concern expressed in the competent Conference Committee on the possible ethical difficulties and interference in the patient-physician relationship in connection with this provision, it was explained that making the results of examinations available to the worker "signified the worker's right simply to be informed of the technical results of these examinations, and that it was not a matter of telling him the diagnostic conclusions to which these results might lead". (Endnote 210)

527. An examination of the legislation of the reporting countries as concerns requirements for medical examinations of workers shows that several basic approaches exist. These may be divided into three categories:

(a) establishment of a universal system of medical supervision covering the whole of the national workforce;

(b) providing for special medical supervision of workers exposed to occupational hazards; and

(c) laying down requirements for general as well as special medical examinations for particularly vulnerable categories of workers.

528. The legislation in some countries establishes a universal system of medical supervision of workers, providing that all employees must be medically examined before starting work and periodically thereafter in order to determine their fitness for the particular type of work to be undertaken. In Poland, for example, as well as in some other socialist countries, every worker should be given initial and periodic medical examinations and clearance tests. (Endnote 211) Both types of examinations are required also in Democratic Yemen. (Endnote 212)

529. In France, the Labour Code requires that all employees should have an annual medical examination. They should also be examined after a change of employment, and when a worker returns to work after absence due to disease or accident, repeated absence from work or maternity leave. (Endnote 213)

530. In the Federal Republic of Germany, all employees must be examined within 12 weeks of starting work and at subsequent intervals prescribed for different activities, to determine fitness for their particular employment. Employees may also request an examination to be carried out due to a suspected connection between an illness and their employment. (Endnote 214)

531. This requirement that all workers be covered by regular medical supervision, wherever they are employed, is closely linked with the development of occupational medical services in the countries concerned. These services usually have a general duty to supervise the health of workers, to undertake the necessary medical examinations, to keep health records and to report accidents. (Endnote 215) Under this duty the occupational medical services in some countries carry out medical examinations of workers in the undertakings where such services exist, even though there are no specific legislative provisions requiring workers to be examined. (Endnote 216) In many countries where occupational medical services are organised in certain industries and/or in undertakings of a specified size, the general tendency is to extend the structure of these services progressively to include the industries, undertakings and categories of workers not yet covered.

532. In an increasing number of countries several national programmes of promoting occupational medicine are being carried out at all levels of the economy. In Colombia and in the Philippines, for example, medical supervision of workers forms part of the programme of preventive medicine in workplaces, which is organised in every undertaking. (Endnote 217) Provision of pre-assignment and periodical medical examinations is also envisaged in the National Occupational Health Plan of Costa Rica. As the Government indicated in its last Article 22 report, the requirement as to medical examination of workers contained in section 285 of the Act respecting occupational risks, is being put into effect by stages with the favourable reaction of the employers. Medical supervision of workers provided under different national arrangements as a rule includes pre-employment and periodical examinations, but sometimes may be considerably more elaborate. In Argentina, for example, six types of medical examinations of workers are provided for in the legislation: pre-employment examination, examination for adaptation to a job, periodical, before changing work, after prolonged absence from work and before leaving the undertaking. (Endnote 218)

533. In some countries general medical supervision of all workers is provided only for pre-employment examinations. For example, pre-employment medical check-ups for all workers to be employed in a factory are required in Nepal. (Endnote 219) A contract of employment may not be concluded without a medical examination in Bolivia. (Endnote 220)

534. In Belgium, all persons under 21 years of age should undergo an examination before beginning work. (Endnote 221)

535. The second of the above-mentioned general approaches which is followed in the majority of countries, consists in providing medical supervision (pre-assignment and periodical) for workers exposed to particular risks in the working environment. These risks may be defined in terms of industries or processes in which workers are employed, (Endnote 222) by substances and other agents to which they may be exposed, (Endnote 223) or by occupational diseases which they may risk contracting. (Endnote 224)

536. In the socialist countries with centrally planned economies special medical supervision is obligatory for workers engaged in arduous jobs or jobs with unhealthy or dangerous conditions (Endnote 225) or if the work involves a health risk for the worker or constitutes a danger to life and limb. (Endnote 226) The same is provided if the general interest so requires (Endnote 227) and in jobs connected with transportation. (Endnote 228) In Yugoslavia all workers exposed to increased concentrations of harmful substances, to noise exceeding the permissible level and to vibrations are required to undergo pre-assignment and periodical examinations. (Endnote 229) Moreover, in some of these countries the law stipulates that if a worker refuses to undergo a medical examination, he shall be prohibited from continuing to perform his work until he does so. (Endnote 230)

537. For unhealthy occupations in Brazil which include exposure to air pollution, noise and vibration, medical examination is required upon entry into employment, every six months thereafter and upon the termination of employment. (Endnote 231)

538. In France and Tunisia the law requires that occupational doctors spend one hour per month on medical supervision for every ten workers engaged in listed activities. These comprise any work habitually involving the preparation, use, handling or exposure to listed chemical agents and any of a list of specific activities including exposure to noise over 85 dB(A) and to vibration in case of the use of hand pneumatic tools. (Endnote 232) In deciding which workers are "habitually exposed" and should be specially supervised, the occupational doctor takes into account the following factors: duration and frequency of exposure to the hazard, nature and gravity of the hazard and the health of the individual employee. (Endnote 233)

539. In Italy, fifty-seven risk factors (mostly chemical substances) in a number of defined activities and processes are listed as requiring medical examinations of workers exposed to them. The list includes activities exposing workers to vibration and shocks (use of pneumatic tools) and to noise, in case of which annual medical examinations are required. Workers in firms where processes entailing such risks are carried out, but who are not employed on the processes themselves, are also required to undergo regular medical examinations if the labour inspectorate feels they are exposed to risks. The inspectorate may order examinations of workers engaged in processes other than those on the list, which expose workers to similar risks and which are subject to compulsory insurance against occupational disease. (Endnote 234) Under separate legislation where cases of lead poisoning have been notified, medical examinations must also be carried out. (Endnote 235) Other statutory provisions establish medical supervision of young workers.

540. In some of the developed countries, however, in addition to the majority of the developing countries, statutory provisions requiring medical examinations of workers exposed to occupational hazards are very scarce and cover only a very small minority of the national workforce. The Committee of Experts has regularly requested governments of countries which have ratified Convention No. 148 to advocate measures being considered with a view to ensuring the medical examination of exposed workers, other than those covered by the existing regulations. (Endnote 236)

541. The periodicity of medical examinations varies considerably, not only from country to country, but also depending on the intensity of the hazards to which workers may be exposed. As concerns air pollution, for example, in Austria different frequencies of medical examinations are established depending on the kind of pollutant to which a worker is exposed, and may be required at intervals between three months and two years. (Endnote 237) This approach is typical for countries which have provided for periodical examinations of workers exposed to dangerous substances. As concerns noise, the diversity is more apparent. In Colombia, for example, audiometric supervision of workers is required every six months, (Endnote 238) in Argentina pre-employment examination should be followed by an examination after the first six months of work and every year thereafter, (Endnote 239) and in Austria periodic examination of workers exposed to noise should be carried out every three years. Such examinations concern in many countries only workers exposed to noise levels exceeding the permissible maximum, e.g. 85 dB(A). The Committee of Experts has had occasion to point out in its comments on the application of the Convention that "according to the Convention all workers exposed to occupational hazards due to noise or vibration (or to air pollution), and not only those exposed to levels exceeding the permitted maximum, must be kept under medical supervision". (Endnote 240)

542. The third general approach to be noted here consists in providing in the occupational safety and health legislation for medical examination of certain particular classes of workers, notably young workers, women workers (especially pregnant women and mothers of young children) and workers who have been absent from work or who have changed jobs. In carrying out the examination of these particular categories of workers, account is taken of their possible exposure to occupational hazards in the working environment including those connected with air pollution, noise and vibration. For these hazards more frequent medical examinations may often be prescribed. In some cases, such examinations are also prescribed for workers responsible for equipment and materials which may present a danger to others, which is of course aimed at protecting other persons through medical supervision of these workers.

(b) Medical supervision after cessation of the assignment

543. Apart from pre-assignment and periodic medical examinations, the Conference thought it useful to consider the question of continuing medical supervision when the worker is no longer liable to certain particularly insidious forms of exposure, to be determined by the competent authority. It is well known that a long period may elapse between exposure to some hazards and the manifestation of their effects. Whether for epidemiological reasons, for the long-term verification of the effectiveness of preventive measures or to facilitate immediate action against delayed effects, the principle of continued medical supervision was incorporated in the conclusions of the Meeting of Experts on Control of Atmospheric Pollution in the Working Environment, held in 1973, and it appears in the instruments concerning the prevention of occupational cancer and safety in the use of asbestos.

544. This principle was also discussed and developed by the Conference in elaborating the instruments on the working environment with a view to applying it to certain other forms of exposure that are particularly insidious or whose action remains ill-defined. Paragraph 16(1)(d) of Recommendation No. 156 states that the supervision of the health of workers provided for in Article 11 of Convention No. 148 should include, as determined by the competent authority, "medical examinations or biological or other tests or investigations after cessation of the assignment which, when medically indicated, should be made available as of right on a regular basis and over a prolonged period".

545. This provision gave rise to a lengthy discussion in the competent Conference Committee, a number of governments pointing to the difficulties that might arise in carrying out medical examinations after cessation of the assignment. Reference was made in particular to the case of migrant labour, and it was suggested that international agreements between national social security systems would no doubt have to be established on this matter in the future. In the Office commentary following the first discussion it was said that "the Office realises that the application of this provision is likely to raise certain difficulties as regards organisation and administration but this is a new approach to the problem of protecting the health of workers who, because of their work, are exposed to particular hazards. Practical experiments are being carried out in certain countries with certain limited groups of workers exposed to the risk of cancer caused by chemical products and ionising radiation. This work will no doubt have to be extended to other types of risks and other groups of workers in so far as it is not technically possible to keep in check the aggressive agents dealt with in the proposed Recommendation". (Endnote 241)

546. Some comments may be necessary as to the substance of this provision of the Recommendation. First, it is for the competent authority to determine what medical examinations or tests should be made available. Second, medical examinations or tests to be provided after cessation of the assignment do not cover all cases but only those for which they are "medically indicated". Taken together these two considerations ensure that the Recommendation is sufficiently flexible on this point. Third, this provision places no obligation on workers to accept such examinations but makes these examinations available to workers concerned "as of right".

547. Two situations are to be considered in practice in respect of the use of this right. In the first place, it would be fairly easy to ensure continuous medical supervision of workers if they remained employed within the undertaking after leaving the assignment that exposed them to particular hazards. In this case the employer may be obliged to ensure that the employee is examined periodically. Such supervision, for example, may continue to be exercised by the occupational medical service of the undertaking, where such exists. Another and more difficult situation emerges where previously exposed workers leave the undertaking. They may then be working for a different employer or stop working altogether. In fact, during the discussion of this provision it was pointed out that it would be difficult to oblige workers to undergo an examination if the work relationship had come to an end. In that case continuous medical supervision should be made available to workers through some kind of special arrangement provided by the competent authority within, for example, the framework of the laws and regulations on preventive measures. Here the Recommendation suggests actions on the part of the competent authority such as requiring that the results of any medical examinations and tests be made available to the worker or to his personal physician, and development of an appropriate system of records of medical information to be kept for a sufficiently long period of time.

548. As to the practical implementation of the Recommendation in respect of medical supervision after cessation of the assignment, the information available to the Committee does not yet permit any concrete evaluation of this issue. However, some information is available in connection with keeping medical records (see below).

(c) Carrying out supervision free of cost and in working hours

549. Article 11, paragraph 2, of Convention No. 148 requires that the supervision of the health of workers provided for in the Convention "shall be free of cost to the worker concerned". Paragraph 17 of Recommendation No. 156 provides, besides the gratuity, that this supervision "should normally be carried out in working hours". The expression "normally" in this case provides for work situations where, as for example for night work, it is not possible for medical examinations to be carried out during working hours. In addition certain specialised examinations can be carried out only at specific times of day, which may not correspond to working hours.

550. The principle that medical examinations should not involve the workers in any expense and should be carried out as far as possible in working hours, without any reduction in workers' pay, has found wide recognition in a number of ILO instruments in which questions of occupational medicine have been considered. As a principle of general application it was recently included in Article 12 of the Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161). Other instruments cited earlier establish this principle in respect of workers exposed to benzene, carcinogenic substances, radiation and asbestos.

551. The principle of free medical examinations is now commonly recognised in the legislation of nearly all countries which provide for such examinations. In the socialist countries, where the cost of medical services is borne by the State, the law simply stipulates that medical examinations shall be free of charge (Endnote 242) adding sometimes an additional guarantee that any expenses incurred in this connection shall be repaid to the worker. (Endnote 243) In other countries the formula most often used in the legislation is that the cost of medical examinations should be borne by the employer. (Endnote 244) This is also the general practice in countries where there are no express provisions on medical examinations being free of cost to the workers (Endnote 245) or where these provisions are worded in an impersonal way. (Endnote 246) In a number of countries, though, different arrangements may be made whereby medical examinations are provided at the cost of the government or of accident insurance bodies, and voluntary and benevolent organisations are also active in this field in some countries.

552. As regards carrying out medical examinations in working hours without any reduction in the workers' pay in the majority of countries the legislation is still silent on this point, but some have covered it. In one country, for example, it is provided that workers should be granted paid leave of absence for such examinations (Endnote 247) and in another it is specified that no loss of pay should be encountered by workers but not that the examinations be carried out in working hours. (Endnote 248) In still another country the law specifically requires conducting examinations outside working hours. (Endnote 249)

II. System of records of medical information

553. The question of establishment of a system of records of medical information concerning workers exposed or liable to be exposed to air pollution, noise and vibration is considered in Paragraph 18 of Recommendation No. 156. This was not the first ILO instrument to provide for the establishment of a system of medical records for certain categories of workers exposed to occupational hazards. Its provisions were based on analogous provisions included in earlier international labour standards and on the experience gained by the Office in supervising their application, all the more so because the systems of medical records set up under those instruments may be regarded, and in fact are regarded in some countries, as elements forming part of the more general system of records provided for in Recommendation No. 156. Thus, medical records are required in ILO instruments in respect of workers exposed to ionising radiations, to carcinogenic substances or agents, and to asbestos, and in a more comprehensive manner in the Occupational Safety and Health Recommendation (No. 164), 1981.

554. The attention given in various ILO instruments to the question of establishing national systems of records of medical information concerning workers exposed to different occupational hazards, reflects the importance of such measures in the general framework of national occupational safety and health policies. Obviously, for the countries which have ratified some or all of the above-mentioned instruments, sooner or later a problem may arise of bringing together different systems of records established under these instruments into a coherent national pattern. The development of a national occupational health service may provide the necessary structures for administration and co-ordination of the existing systems of records. In other countries, the provisions of the above-mentioned Conventions and Recommendations may usefully be taken into account at the initial and later stages of the process of instituting a national system of medical records for workers exposed to air pollution, noise and vibration hazards in the working environment.

555. The basic elements in the process of establishing a system of medical records, which may be compiled from the mosaic of national statutory provisions concerning medical surveillance of workers, consist of the following requirements:

(a) Employers must keep registers of workers employed in hazardous occupations (Endnote 250) or exposed to specified harmful agents in specified activities (Endnote 251) in order that they may undergo regular medical examinations or for other purposes.

(b) Employers must keep registers of workers suffering from occupational or other diseases (Endnote 252) and registers of occupational accidents. (Endnote 253) Lists of recognised occupational diseases are established by law or regulation.

(c) Individual records of medical examinations of workers should be kept in the undertaking, (Endnote 254) as should a special register for such examinations. (Endnote 255)

(d) Suspected and confirmed cases of occupational diseases, as well as cases of occupational accidents, are generally required to be reported to the competent authorities (sometimes also to the organisation responsible for occupational insurance) either by the employer himself or by the doctor attending the case. Dangerous incidents and findings of unfitness for work must also be reported in some countries. A copy of a report made is kept in the worker's health record. (Endnote 256) A register including information on all incidents should be kept in every factory and an annual report should be made to the inspectorate. (Endnote 257)

(e) The competent authority prescribes special report forms for notifiable occurrencies or, more generally, criteria may be established for compiling registers of biostatistical data on the health of workers for uniform use in the regional or national framework. (Endnote 258) "Biostatistical" data comprises the statistical results of physical examinations and periodical medical tests, as well as data on absences from work due to occupational diseases or accidents.

(f) Workers as well as their personal physicians are informed of any pathological effects on health revealed as a result of medical examinations. (Endnote 259)

(g) Where health records are kept for individual employees, when leaving employment they should usually be given a copy of the records to be shown to their next employer or doctor. Alternatively such records should be kept in the establishment (by the occupational medical services for example) for a prescribed period of time. (Endnote 260) Such records, if they are not kept by the undertaking, may be given to the departing worker by the local competent authorities if the workers concerned were engaged in the operations liable to cause cancer or other serious health impairment. (Endnote 261) If upon termination of employment the examination shows an occupational disease, the undertaking is obliged to inform the competent service for further medical supervision of the worker concerned. (Endnote 262) In this respect a general principle is established in one country according to which "the Government shall take the necessary measures in connection with the medical examination of a person in possession of a personal health record". (Endnote 263)

(h) At the regional level, combined registers of biostatistical data and personal health records may be created and maintained by the competent authorities who have the right of access to the data contained within them. In Lombardy, Italy under the regional law made in implementation of Act No. 833 on the National Health Service, local health units keep records of workers exposed to special listed substances compiled from information provided by employers or collected by the units themselves. Employers are required to provide information to local health units on the type of processes used in their firms, including their toxicological characteristics. From these records they compile a record of special work risks, a copy of which is given to workers to inform their own doctors and other local health unit services of the risks they may face. They also draw up risk maps for the various industrial sectors within their area, for different types of firms and for certain specific manufacturing units. (Endnote 264)

(i) Finally, an example of the comprehensive measures to be taken at the national level is provided by the legislation of Argentina where the Secretariat of Public Health is obliged to establish and maintain the National Register of Health which should contain pathological data of pre-employment and periodical examinations or examinations following occupational accidents or diseases, thus constituting a health history of each worker in his employment in different areas of the country and in changing occupations in the area of residence. (Endnote 265)

(j) In many countries occupational health statistics and other related data are published annually by the competent authority.

556. All of the measures described here figure in the legislation of different countries, though no country has as yet adopted a system of medical records as extensive as this. This description may, however, serve as a model for national administrations setting out on the way toward creating a comprehensive system.

III. Situation of workers whose continued employment is medically inadvisable

557. It is evident that in some cases medical supervision of workers may reveal that continued employment involving exposure to a given occupational hazard would adversely affect worker's health and is therefore medically inadvisable. In such cases it is important to protect the worker against the negative effects, both on his income and on his career, that may result from measures taken in consequence of the medical examinations.

558. Article 11, paragraph 3, of Convention No. 148 and Paragraph 19 of Recommendation No. 156 thus include the following provision: "Where continued assignment to work involving exposure to air pollution, noise or vibration is found to be medically inadvisable, every effort shall be made, consistent with national practice and conditions, to provide the worker concerned with suitable alternative employment or to maintain his income through social security measures or otherwise."

559. Whereas certain earlier ILO Recommendations (Endnote 266) dealing with exposure to specific risks already suggested helping the workers concerned by finding them alternative employment in such cases, Convention No. 148 was the first Convention in the field of occupational safety and health to include such a requirement. It also extended the scope of the positive measures that may be taken in such cases by including the possibility of maintaining the income of the worker concerned through social security measures or otherwise. Maintaining income through payment of social security benefits may sometimes be the only solution to protecting a worker whose exposure in the course of his work has made him physically unable to pursue any productive employment. It was agreed in the competent Conference Committee that the aim of this provision was to ensure that there should be no loss of income for the workers concerned. The expression "or otherwise" in this context, as appears from the discussions in the competent Conference Committee, was intended to make it possible to take into account the various administrative structures of the compensation systems adopted by different countries within social security or similar schemes. (Endnote 267)

560. This provision is obviously of a "promotional" character, which is clearly reflected in its wording. It states that "every effort shall be made ...", and necessarily carries a wide measure of flexibility as to its application which should be "consistent with national practice and conditions". The Committee of Experts draws particular attention to this point, as this language is aimed at obviating the difficulties that countries might otherwise have in ratifying the Convention.

561. The first thing that appears in reviewing the legislation and practice of the reporting countries is that increasing attention and care is being provided for handicapped workers and workers who find themselves in a disadvantaged situation because of health troubles, reduced working capacity, age, etc. This tendency is reflected in the growing volume of specific regulations to that effect in different fields of labour law, occupational safety and health, social security, employment security legislation, as well as special legislation concerning rehabilitation and reintegration of handicapped workers. It may be recalled that on the international level the ILO adopted in 1983 the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (Disabled Persons) Convention (No. 159) and Recommendation (No. 168), which deals with this subject.

562. A great variety of national provisions and practical arrangements have been taken which give effect to these requirements of Convention No. 148 and Recommendation No. 156. Many governments have indicated in their reports that if medical examinations detect health problems, the social security services or the occupational health services ensure the worker's treatment or rehabilitation. As concerns the ratifying countries, the Committee of Experts has consistently inquired in such situations as to the specific measures taken to provide workers with suitable alternative employment after such treatment or rehabilitation, particularly if they are not entitled to social security benefits, as well as about other measures aimed at maintaining workers' income. (Endnote 268) Some examples of the measures taken by reporting countries are given below.

563. In the socialist countries comprehensive regulations exist concerning workers who must seek different employment for medical reasons. In these countries the management of the undertaking is obliged in the first place to employ handicapped workers and provide them with more favourable working conditions in accordance with medical recommendations. (Endnote 269) In hazardous undertakings, sheltered workposts for this purpose are created, as well as vocational rehabilitation workshops. (Endnote 270) The management is also obliged to transfer to easier jobs workers whose state of health makes this necessary, with the consent of the individual concerned. (Endnote 271) In such cases the undertaking should offer to the worker concerned another reasonable job corresponding to his abilities and state of health, either in the same undertaking or, if this is not possible, in another one; the undertaking must also arrange for the worker to receive the necessary training for the new job and to reimburse any expenses connected with such training. (Endnote 272)

564. Where the worker is transferred, on the advice of a medical practitioner, to other work not exposing him to the hazard, and such transfer results in a lower rate of remuneration, the worker is entitled to a compensatory allowance paid by his establishment for a maximum period of three months (Endnote 273) or of six months (Endnote 274) from the date of transfer. In certain cases the worker may continue to be paid his previous average remuneration for the entire duration of his transfer to the lower-paid job, or he may draw an allowance from the State social insurance. (Endnote 275)

565. Similar provisions exist also in other countries. In Norway, if an employee has become handicapped in his occupation as the result of accident, disease, overstrain or the like, the employer shall, to the extent possible, effect the necessary measures so as to enable the employee to be given or to retain suitable work. Preferably the employee shall be afforded the opportunity to continue his normal work, possibly after special adaptation of the work, alteration of technical apparatus, rehabilitation or the like. (Endnote 276)

566. In Japan, where, as a result of medical examinations, it is deemed necessary for preserving the health of workers, the employer shall take such steps as change of workplace, change of work, reduction of the hours of work, and in general establishment and improvement of facilities and arrangements, taking into consideration the actual situation of the workers concerned. (Endnote 277)

567. In Sweden the 1974 Promotion of Employment Act includes rules aimed at improving the prospects of employees with reduced work capacity, among others, to obtaining and retaining employment. Special adjustment groups, according to the Government, operate under this Act to improve working conditions for such employees. It is also the duty of the safety committee and the safety delegates elected in the undertakings to consider matters concerning the disabled. In several companies personnel health services see to the transfer of employees to alternative duties. The Government indicates, moreover, that the 1982 Security of Employment Act does not include age, illness or reduced work capacity among the objective grounds for dismissal. As to maintaining the income of the workers concerned, under the Social Insurance Act an employee can receive a sickness allowance for up to one year while undergoing vocational rehabilitation. The full allowance is, however, payable only if the work capacity of the employee is reduced by at least in half. (Endnote 278)

568. In a number of countries there are no express provisions in the legislation for securing alternative employment for workers who cannot continue in their present job for medical reasons, but in many of them provisions exist for maintaining the income of such workers for a certain period of time. In the United Kingdom, for example, the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act, 1978 provides that employees who are suspended from normal work under special health and safety regulations have the right to receive normal pay for every week of suspension up to a maximum of 26 weeks. This obligation is viewed as a sufficient guarantee that the employer will take measures to find alternative work for the worker concerned. The Act also provides for non-payment of the worker's salary in respect of any period for which the employer has offered to provide him with suitable alternative work and the employee has unreasonably refused to perform this work. (Endnote 279)

569. Finally, some arrangements, mostly of a practical nature, may be found in a number of countries where no legal provisions exist requiring that a worker in this situation should be provided with suitable alternative employment or that his income should be maintained by other measures. This is the case, for example, in Austria where the law states that no worker shall be called upon to do any unhealthy work if his state of health does not permit such employment (Endnote 280) but provides no guarantees as to the future employment of the worker concerned. However, as the Government pointed out in its report, in accordance with section 211 of the General Social Insurance Act, a transitional pension not exceeding the amount of the full pension may be granted for up to one year to persons for whom the pursuit of their previous occupation involves the risk of contracting an occupational disease or aggravating an existing disease. The purpose of this pension is to enable them to become adapted to another occupation that does not expose them to such risks and to compensate for any reduction in earnings or other financial loss resulting from such change. (Endnote 281)

Endnotes

Endnote 2

Endnote 3

Endnote 4

Endnote 5

Endnote 6

Endnote 7

Endnote 8

Endnote 9

Endnote 10

Endnote 11

Endnote 12

Endnote 13

Endnote 14

Endnote 15

Endnote 16

Endnote 17

Endnote 18

Endnote 19

Endnote 20

Endnote 21

Endnote 22

Endnote 23

Endnote 24

Endnote 26

Endnote 27

Endnote 28

Endnote 29

Endnote 30

Endnote 31

Endnote 32

Endnote 33

Endnote 34

Endnote 35

Endnote 36

Endnote 37

Endnote 38

Endnote 39

Endnote 40

Endnote 41

Endnote 42

Endnote 43

Endnote 44

Endnote 45

Endnote 46

Endnote 47

Endnote 48

Endnote 49

Endnote 50

Endnote 51

Endnote 52

Endnote 53

Endnote 54

Endnote 55

Endnote 56

Endnote 57

Endnote 58

Endnote 59

Endnote 60

Endnote 61

Endnote 62

Endnote 63

Endnote 64

Endnote 65

Endnote 66

Endnote 67

Endnote 68

Endnote 69

Endnote 70

Endnote 71

Endnote 72

Endnote 73

Endnote 74

Endnote 75

Endnote 76

Endnote 77

Endnote 78

Endnote 79

Endnote 80

Endnote 81

Endnote 82

Endnote 83

Endnote 84

Endnote 85

Endnote 86

Endnote 87

Endnote 88

Endnote 89

Endnote 90

Endnote 91

Endnote 92

Endnote 93

Endnote 94

Endnote 95

Endnote 96

Endnote 97

Endnote 98

Endnote 99

Endnote 100

Endnote 101

Endnote 102

Endnote 103

Endnote 104

Endnote 105

Endnote 106

Endnote 107

Endnote 108

Endnote 109

Endnote 110

Endnote 111

Endnote 112

Endnote 113

Endnote 114

Endnote 115

Endnote 116

Endnote 117

Endnote 118

Endnote 119

Endnote 120

Endnote 121

Endnote 122

Endnote 123

Endnote 124

Endnote 125

Endnote 126

Endnote 127

Endnote 128

Endnote 129

Endnote 130

Endnote 131

Endnote 132

Endnote 133

Endnote 134

Endnote 135

Endnote 136

Endnote 137

Endnote 138

Endnote 139

Endnote 140

Endnote 141

Endnote 142

Endnote 143

Endnote 144

Endnote 145

Endnote 146

Endnote 147

Endnote 148

Endnote 149

Endnote 150

Endnote 151

Endnote 152

Endnote 153

Endnote 154

Endnote 155

Endnote 156

Endnote 157

Endnote 158

Endnote 159

Endnote 160

Endnote 161

Endnote 162

Endnote 163

Endnote 164

Endnote 165

Endnote 166

Endnote 167

Endnote 168

Endnote 169

Endnote 170

Endnote 171

Endnote 172

Endnote 173

Endnote 174

Endnote 175

Endnote 176

Endnote 177

Endnote 178

Endnote 179

Endnote 180

Endnote 181

Endnote 182

Endnote 183

Endnote 184

Endnote 185

Endnote 186

Endnote 187

Endnote 188

Endnote 189

Endnote 190

Endnote 191

Endnote 192

Endnote 193

Endnote 194

Endnote 195

Endnote 196

Endnote 197

Endnote 198

Endnote 199

Endnote 200

Endnote 201

Endnote 202

Endnote 203

Endnote 204

Endnote 205

Endnote 206

Endnote 207

Endnote 208

Endnote 209

Endnote 210

Endnote 211

Endnote 212

Endnote 213

Endnote 214

Endnote 215

Endnote 216

Endnote 217

Endnote 218

Endnote 219

Endnote 220

Endnote 221

Endnote 222

Endnote 223

Endnote 224

Endnote 225

Endnote 226

Endnote 227

Endnote 228

Endnote 229

Endnote 230

Endnote 231

Endnote 232

Endnote 233

Endnote 234

Endnote 235

Endnote 236

Endnote 237

Endnote 238

Endnote 239

Endnote 240

Endnote 241

Endnote 242

Endnote 243

Endnote 244

Endnote 245

Endnote 246

Endnote 247

Endnote 248

Endnote 249

Endnote 260

Endnote 261

Endnote 262

Endnote 263

Endnote 264

Endnote 265

Endnote 266

Endnote 267

Endnote 268

Endnote 269

Endnote 270

Endnote 271

Endnote 272

Endnote 273

Endnote 274

Endnote 275

Endnote 276

Endnote 277

Endnote 278

Endnote 279

Endnote 280

Endnote 281

Cross references
Constitution: Article 19
Constitution: Article 22
Constitution: Article 35
Conventions: C115 Radiation Protection Convention, 1960
Conventions: C136 Benzene Convention, 1971
Conventions: C161 Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985
Conventions: C162 Asbestos Convention, 1986
Recommendations:R120 Hygiene (Commerce and Offices) Recommendation, 1964
Recommendations:R141 Crew Accommodation (Noise Control) Recommendation, 1970
Recommendations:R147 Occupational Cancer Recommendation, 1974
Recommendations:R164 Occupational Safety and Health Recommendation, 1981
Recommendations:R171 Occupational Health Services Recommedation, 1985
Recommendations:R172 Asbestos Recommendation, 1986