• Index Seminar Reports  • Introduction • Background • Aims • Plan • Activity Sheets Methods  • Baltic Region  • Central Europe  • South-East Europe  • Ukraine and Russia  Survey Reports  • Regional Summary  • Bulgaria  • Czech Republic  • Estonia  • Hungary  • Lithuania  • Russia  • Slovakia  • Ukraine  • Data

Introduction to Central and Eastern European Sub-Regional Seminars for Trade Union Experts on Occupational Safety and Health, 1999-2000

After the breakdown of the previous institutional system in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, trade unions had to assume new responsibilities in the area of occupational safety and health and environment (OSHE) also. The needs arising from this were discussed in a regional seminar organised by the International Labour Office in Tallinn, Estonia in December 1997.

The first ideas for a questionnaire survey on occupational safety and health and the environment were also developed at the seminar and several unions expressed interest in participating. The survey (questionnaire attached) was eventually carried out in eight countries - Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Russian Federation, Slovak Republic and Ukraine - with results coming in by the end of 1998 and analysis done in 1999. The survey was aimed at workers from the shop floor, and was conducted by worker representatives or health and safety representatives where they existed.

From the start, the intention was to study the experiences, priorities and concerns of those directly exposed to risks at work. This attitudinal approach, although necessarily subjective, added an important dimension to the trade unions’ policy development which had so far focused mainly on structural, financial and institutional aspects. Taking account of their members’ priorities also means that unions can rely on support from the shop floor for their policies.

Following the analysis of the survey, four sub-regional seminars took place in 1999 and 2000 to allow for discussion of the results and to help trade unions develop their own policies and national practical action plans based on their experiences and the results of the survey:

• Sub-regional OSHE experts seminar for trade unions in South East Europe (Bulgaria, FYR Macedonia, Moldova, Romania): 13 - 17 November 1999, Sofia, Bulgaria.

• Sub-regional OSHE experts seminar for trade unions in the Baltic region (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland): 17 - 19 February 2000 - Riga, Latvia.

• Sub-regional OSHE experts seminar for trade unions in Central Europe (Czech Republic, Croatia, Hungary, Slovak Republic): 4 - 6 May 2000, Bratislava, Slovak Republic.

• Sub-regional OSHE experts seminar for trade unions in Ukraine and Russia: 4 - 6 July 2000, Kyiv, Ukraine.

The overall aims of all four workshops were the same:

• to present and discuss the findings of the surveys with the national trade union experts on OSHE;

• to use these findings as a basis for exchange of experience with trade union experts from other countries in the region which did not take part in the survey;

• to develop trade union priorities, policies and strategies on OSHE in the light of the survey findings.

The Baltic sub-regional seminar had the additional goal of reviewing information management to strengthen national OSHE policies and strategies. Both this seminar and the seminar for Central European countries also had the goal of familiarizing the experts with the ILO Convention on Occupational Safety and Health in Agriculture which was to be discussed during the ILO’s Annual Labour Conference in June 2000.

Plan

Just as the overall aims of the seminars were similar so were the basic plans of all four seminars.

Presentation of survey results. All the seminars started with a presentation of the survey results relating to those countries which took part in the survey and which were represented at any given seminar. Those national coordinators of the survey who were present at the seminars also gave their insights and feedback concerning the survey. This part of the seminars was used as a basis to start participants thinking about priorities, what resources are available in the way of occupational health services, monitoring, control strategies, information and structures locally and nationally, all of which have implications and require answers in terms of union commitment to policies, education, negotiation, etc.

Using a questionnaire survey. This was followed in some of the seminars by an exercise in using a questionnaire survey. Any union policy and action depends on the support of its members, and will thus stand a better chance of succeeding if it addresses the concerns of the members. This was one of the aims of the questionnaire survey carried out. Other unions at the seminars had not taken part in the survey but may wish to use or adapt the questionnaire to specific groups of workers or issues in future. This was an exercise in small group work, using the attached activity sheet: "Using a questionnaire survey".

Defining priorities. Defining OSHE priorities was the first step in the logical progression of the seminars, from identifying a problem through to action to resolve it. This was a brainstorming exercise to come up with a list of concerns, using the attached activity sheet "Identifying priority issues concerning OSHE". Obviously, trade unions cannot deal with all the pressing problems at once, so priorities have to be made, in reality and also to have a short-list of issues to work on during the seminar. How do we establish priorities?

• Firstly, a priority issue could be a widespread problem that is the root cause of others - job insecurity for example. Unfortunately, such problems are often the most basic, the most entrenched, most difficult or expensive to put right. They require creative thinking, often in cooperation with other organisations or sectors of society, but they will have the most results in the long-term and be the most sustainable.

• Secondly, a priority issue could be one that causes the most concern - noise, vibration, dust, eye strain, musculoskeletal problems, to take some examples from the survey results. Confronting a specific concern of local workers can be easier than taking on a national problem such as job insecurity.

• Thirdly, it could be more effective to start on an issue that is easier and more concrete, something that can show results straight away - an awareness-raising campaign, with leaflets, on getting fresh water provided in hot workplaces, for example. Success in any project, however small, will convince workers and management that conditions can be improved and make it more likely that they will give their support for further, perhaps more ambitious, programmes.

Developing a trade union policy on OSHE. A policy is necessary to help both the leadership of the union and the members establish what is meant by OSHE issues, what are the immediate and long-term goals for these issues and what the strategies are for achieving these goals. Policies focus action and guide the activities of local unions and representatives. Working with a short-list of priorities that came out of the previous session, the participants were then invited to develop a policy on how to deal with the problems. This was done using the attached activity sheet "Formulation of a trade union policy on priority issues" which allowed the participants to define what action to take on each issue, how to go about this action and the time frame needed – all the components to come up with the basis for a union policy later.

Planning for action. A policy is no good by itself – it has to lead to practical action. This part of the seminars looked at the strategies available to implement trade union action on some identified priorities. Some of the strategies considered included:

1. Information gathering. Information is necessary to back up union campaigns and other actions, whether this is through surveys, workplace inspections and environmental audits or collecting laws and standards, local materials, case studies of good practice, etc. (An exercise in risk-mapping as a means of getting information about workplace hazards, prioritising them and developing a plan of action to control them was carried out in one of the seminars - see attached activity sheet: "Risk mapping".)

2. Awareness-raising. Results from the survey show that workers may be aware of hazards but often don’t think they can do anything. They may be apathetic because they think the solutions are beyond their control. They may accept risks because of unemployment, or they may really be unaware of some risks, especially the work-relatedness of some diseases such as asthma, or of those with long latency periods. But action on OSHE issues is often largely political and social rather than technical, and original and creative ways of raising awareness of members and of raising the profile of OSHE on a local and national level have to be defined.

3. Education and training. Education is needed to understand OSHE issues, and training is needed to put new knowledge into effect, to be able to participate in developing plans and in decision-making at all levels. Informing and educating workers to be motivated is usually a major concern, as is training worker representatives of health and safety committees to look for and identify hazards, evaluate them and work with employers to get them righted.

4. Structures. The aim is to have a joint union-management health and safety committee in every workplace, with the objective of regular inspection to check for hazards, investigation of occupational accidents and work-related diseases, and representation of workers in dealing with employers on OSHE issues. (Most of the workplaces surveyed had mentioned that they benefited from a joint health and safety committee and/or a union committee.)

5. Technical support. Those workers trained to protect worker’s interests will need technical support from their union and federation. Representatives who lack support will become disheartened and ineffective. They may need inquiry services, field inspection services, documentation, awareness promotion materials, etc. They will also need the union’s research and analysis of critical issues, industries and possible solutions. In other words, they will need to know where to look for expert information and how to evaluate that information.

6. Collective bargaining. A collective agreement on OSHE means that all parties are obliged to do more than pay just lip-service to their responsibilities. Over 90% of the workplaces in the survey addressed OSH in a collective agreement, although the survey did not look at what issues were actually in the agreements. Contract language from other unions’ agreements, or wording from ILO Conventions, even if these have not been ratified, can often be used as a basis for agreements.

7. Campaigning. Unions can challenge attitudes on OSHE with an organised, planned campaign, or join a national campaign on an issue that will further their interests - such as promotion of employment policies that contribute to a healthy working environment, retaining union participation in OSH, or reducing emissions from an oil refinery, to name but a few examples. Campaigns have to be well thought out, with objectives, target audiences, tactics and resources. Local activities have an important role to play, but they can reach a large audience.

8. Tripartite and bipartite consultation at national level. This is important in the legislative process, in National Safety Councils and other OSHE institutions, with employers’ organisations, etc. Lobbying on an informal basis is also important. Coalitions among organisations with similar interests will improve impact, for example with other unions, with environmental groups if relevant, with employers over a specific issue. Coordination of union and federation work can be very effective if different areas of interest are at stake. Examples include coordination between the producers and users of chemicals - the chemical manufacturing workers and the agricultural workers - or in the energy sector - links between miners, power production and electricity distribution workers.

With these sort of strategies in mind, the participants chose a priority issue and used the attached activity sheet "Planning a strategy for action" to work out in detail what they could do to tackle a particular problem in the short-term, over the next three to four months for example, to see what is feasible on a practical level.

It was stressed that all of these activities were not limited to these particular workshops, but could be used as a basis for thinking through strategy for any union OSHE-related problems at a later date.

This strategy, from getting information using a survey, through identifying major concerns or priorities and developing policy on tackling those priorities, to thinking about action plans to implement the policy, was common to all the seminars. Other areas of interest that were discussed in some seminars included:

• ILO Convention on Occupational Safety and Health in Agriculture, which had its first discussion at the ILO Annual Labour Conference in June 2000. The proposed Convention was seen as an essential step in the process to protect agricultural workers, recognised as working in one of the most hazardous sectors of industry. Hundreds of thousands of work-related deaths occur each year, as do poisonings, cancer, reproductive impairments, etc., from pesticides and other agrochemicals. A major characteristic of agricultural work is that work and living arrangements are often not separated, resulting in almost constant exposure to hazardous chemicals and conditions. The ILO also estimates that over half the total fatal workplace accidents worldwide occur amongst agricultural workers. Globally, agriculture is the largest employer, accounting for around 50% of the world’s workforce, but agricultural workers are often subject to lower standards in national law, being excluded from employment injury benefit or insurance schemes in many countries. Child labour is also prevalent in the agricultural sector with 70% of child labourers being found here. For these reasons participants were encouraged to support the development of a strong ILO Convention, by lobbying their government delegations to the ILO, by defining tactics, collecting information, analysing the current situation and briefing worker delegations, etc.

• Management of information. A key goal of the Baltic sub-regional seminar was to introduce the participants to substantive discussions concerning the management of information under a Finnish-funded project "Strengthening trade unions’ capacity for information management in the Baltic States" (see the report of the Baltic sub-regional seminar for key findings).

The seminars were based on participatory training techniques which allowed the participants to build on their experiences and ideas, and a new input - the results of the questionnaire survey. Small group work allowed for maximum participation and interaction in - very importantly - a language individuals were comfortable with. This is also the key to coming up with some very concrete, practical and even innovative and imaginative ideas for action. These techniques - small group work using activity sheets and reporting back to plenary with discussion of the results - proved very effective, not only for results but also for ideas for future union training techniques in the region.

[Index |  Introduction | Baltic Region | Central Europe | South-East Europe | Ukraine and Russia ]
[ Aims |  Plan |  Activity Sheets |  Methods ]