Transcript Document

European Commission / TAIEX
Multi-country Workshop on Developing Systems for Occupational
Health and Safety Through Social Dialogue
Brussels
18 February 2013
EU Sectoral Social Dialogue on Occupational Health
and Safety – Patterns of Cooperation and Cases
HOSPEEM and EPSU Framework Agreement
on Prevention from Sharp Injuries in the
Hospital and Health Care Sector; Directive
2010/32/EU and relevant follow-up activities
Mathias Maucher
Policy Officer “Health and Social Services” – EPSU
Elisa Benedetti
Policy Officer - HOSPEEM
Framework Agreement on the
prevention of sharps injuries (I)
• 6 June 2006: EP Resolution “Healthcare workers and bloodborne infections due to needlestick injuries”; foresaw the
incorporation of provisions on needlestick injury prevention
into Directive 2000/54/EC on biological agents at work,
following extensive preparation and advocacy work
• 2006-2007: 1st stage consultation of social partners => show
no interest to take an initiative
• 7 February 2008: Technical Seminar
o with financial and organisational support of European
Commission (EC)
o with presentation of case studies from various countries
o with involvement of external experts
• 2007-2008: 2nd stage consultation of social partners =>
interest to take an initiative
• 2008: After overcoming internal differences of opinion amongst
a number of affiliates on how to proceed, EPSU agrees to
enter in negotiations with HOSPEEM
Framework Agreement on the
prevention of sharps injuries (II)
• January 2009: European Commission (DG EMPL) agrees
o to adjourn, for the time of social partner’s negotiation, own
legislative proposal
o to allocate a maximum of 9 months to conclude the negotiations
between the sectoral social partners
• Legal basis: Art. 155 TFEU: (1) bilateral social dialogue can
lead to contractual relations, including agreements; (2)
“voluntary route” of implementation relying on national
procedures and practices specific to management and labour
and MS OR implementation by Council Directive
• HOSPEEM and EPSU appear in an audition before the EP
(EMPL Committee) to answer questions on why the social
partners wished to negotiate on a subject MEPs had taken
initiative some years ago and been working on ever since
• Calendar: 16 January 2009 / 2 June 2009: Start / End of
negotiations; 11 July 2009: Signature of Framework Agreement
Directive 2010/32/EU on the
prevention of sharps injuries in the hospital
and health care sector (I)
• 10 January 2010: Social partners to explain text and answer
questions in Social Questions Working Party of Council
o Scope of directive, i.e. which health workers covered?
o (Methods of/ban of) recapping and safe(ty) medical devices
• 4 February 2010: Joint clarification (http://www.epsu.org/a/6261)
• Directive 2010/32/EU of 10 May 2010 implements the
Framework Agreement concluded by HOSPEEM and EPSU and
makes it legally binding across the EU
• Lays down the rules on penalties (by Member States) – to be
effective, proportionate and dissuasive – applicable to
infringements of national provisions
• Entering into force 3 years after adoption = 11.05.2013
• Content-wise identical with Framework Agreement that has
technically been inserted as an annex to the directive
Directive 2010/32/EU on the
prevention of sharps injuries in the hospital
and health care sector (II)
• Protect and improve the health and safety of patients and
health professionals
• One mosaic in array of Community legislation on occupational
safety and health
• Key principles/elements
o 1) Risk assessment (technology, work organisation, working
conditions, level of qualifications, work-related psycho-social
factors; working environment
o 2) Elimination, prevention and protection (safe procedures;
medical devices with safety-engineered protection mechanisms;
ban of recapping; safe disposal)
o 3) Information, awareness-raising
o 4) Training
o 5) Reporting
Political tasks and challenges
from a trade union perspective
• Strengthen and institutionalise the role of social partners in
occupational health and safety (OSH), in decision making
processes within MS, in the framework of implementing EUlegislation or EU Action Programmes as well as with regard
to structures at the level of health care institutions (e.g. health
and safety representatives)
• Provide/elaborate appropriate guidance, training material,
etc. (currently collected @ http://www.epsu.org/a/9157)
• Embed topic in a broader OSH approach in EU-level social
dialogue (medical sharps; third party violence; older/ageing
workforce; musculoskeletal disorders)
• Short-time focus: Coverage of social (care) services, in
particularly elderly care in institutions and at home
• Mid-term view: Extend coverage of principles and key
features to other sectors and institutions, e.g. prisons, social
work, schools, waste disposal, e.g. by means of guidelines
What have European social
partners done since 2010?
• (Joint) activities of HOSPEEM and EPSU to support
awareness raising and dissemination as well as concrete
steps to implement and give effect to Directive 2010/32/EU
(as social partner-based EU legislation) on the ground
o Recurrent issue on agenda of Sectoral Social Dialogue
Committee for the Hospital Sector to check for follow-up
o Since 2011 cooperation with OSHA (dissemination of info via
webpage, newsletter, material such as info leaflets or training
guides), since 2012 reaching out to additional stakeholders,
including MS’s governments through OSHA’s national focal
points (tripartite structure)
o Participation in and contribution to seminars and conferences
(WHO Europe; European Biosafety Network)
o Inclusion of the prevention from sharps injuries as one of the
key issues in a HOSPEEM project on strengthening social
dialogue in the hospital sector in the Baltic States run in 2011
o Joint project (http://www.epsu.org/r/629)
What are we doing now ?
dd
HOSPEEM-EPSU joint project "Promotion and support of
the implementation of Directive 2010/32/EU on the
prevention of sharps injuries in the hospital and
healthcare sector”
October 2012 – September 2013
Why this project:
oInterest of sectoral social partners and formal obligation to engage
and stay involved
oFramework Agreement: possibility to review its application 5 years
later
oClause 11 on the implementation of Directive 2010/32/EU
Aims:
oTo gather information on the transposition and implementation at the
national level;
oExchange information about existing guidance and toolkits at the
national and local level
oTo learn about the practical issues being raised at the organisational
level in the implementation of the agreement
Activities and first results
Dd
Main steps:
o Survey
o Events: 3 regional seminars (Ireland, Austria, Italy) +
Final conference (Spain)
o Deliverables
and
Follow-up:
website
(http://www.epsu.org/r/629), reports from regional
seminars and final report
State of play: preliminary results survey (14 responses
received from UK, Finland, Sweden, Denmark,
Netherlands, Latvia, Cyprus, Spain, Belarus and
Estonia: 6 employers + 8 TU) + findings Dublin
seminar
Significance of issue of sharps injuries
21 million workers active in the hospital and healthcare sector in
Europe. 1 million needle-stick injuries estimated to occur annually
(source: GHK survey, 2011)
Status of transposition
Transposition completed: 3
countries (NL, SE, (Belarus))
Progress
towards
transpositi
on of
legislation
(deadline
May
2013)...
Transposition prior to May 2013:
DK, LV
Transposition likely by deadline: SF,
UK
No clear date given: CY, EE, ES
(source: GHK survey, 2013)
Nature of transposition
Legislation only: CY, DK, ES,
SE, SF, UK
Directive
likely to be
transposed
as...
Legislation and collective
agreement: Belarus, Latvia
Collective agreement
Other method of transposition: NL
(Incorporated in existing Guideline)
(source: GHK survey, 2013)
Challenges of implementation
• Data gathering
o Common concern of underreporting of injuries
o Often injured persons blame themselves and do not want to report
“their mistake”
o Hospitals in some countries (UK, IE, SE, FI, NL) have procedures for
reporting already in place – the question is rather what happens
afterwards to the data that was gathered – standard procedures at
country/EU level?
o What needs to be reported – what type of injury – to whom to be
reported, which formalities would need to be complied with
o Central data – monitoring and follow-up – can be costly Vs budget cuts
o Training on reporting should be insured already in the initial training – in
order to create awareness.
Challenges of implementation
• Main provisions
oReporting and training obligations can be too costly (as well as safer
products)– cost-efficient solutions need to be promoted and found;
oWhat is a correct risk assessment – setting up procedures might be again
costly for organisations;
oRisk assessments need to take this into account and more prevention
measures might need to be applied (it can be as costly as buying the
products);
oMore standardisation of training is needed;
oWhat is a safety device – incidents occur also because of safety devices –
standardised criteria?
oTendering procedures for health and safety devices should not just take
into account the price but also what is the safest device
oQuestion about sanctions if organisations are not complying with
legislation
oSome workers are still excluded from the scope of the Directive – such as
waste management, social work sector or nursing homes.
Key elements of good transposition
• Setting up of a monitoring body/ data surveillance body at
national level
• Setting up of a health and safety committee at organisational
level
• Standardised vocational training for all types of health care
workers
• Banning of recapping on the basis of risk assessment
• Free vaccination of affected workers
• Standardised minimum requirements for safety devices and
policy for safe working procedures – consultation with workers
• Creation of a national working group to work on guidelines for
risk assessment, safety products and safe working procedures,
best practice exchange.
• Awareness raising and information campaigns: not only
legislation but also cultural change is needed
Thank you for your attention!
• Mathias Maucher - EPSU (European
Federation of Public Service Unions)
o [email protected]
o www.epsu.org
• Elisa Benedetti – HOSPEEM (European
Hospital and Healthcare Employers’
Association)
o [email protected]
o http://hospeem.org