CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee notes the Government’s report and its reply to its previous comment. It notes that the provisions of the Labour Code of 1926, and particularly sections R.231-72, establish limits in the merchant marine sector for loads for which the manual transport is inevitable. The Committee also notes the Government’s announcement that a draft order prepared by the Medical Labour Inspector will be submitted to the Government with a view to improving the regulations in force along the lines indicated by the Committee. In this respect, the Committee notes that the only regulation currently in force concerning the manual transportation of loads by workers is Order No. 1211 T of 19 March 1993, which gives effect to section 5 of Order No. 34/CP of 23 February 1989, which itself only establishes minimum safety and health requirements for the manual transport of loads which constitute a risk for workers, and particularly to their backs and lumbar regions. The Committee recalls that, in its previous comment, it noted the information provided by the Government, and particularly the findings of a survey of occupational physicians.

Articles 3 and 7 of the Convention. The Committee noted the finding of this survey that in general heavy loads are only handled occasionally, except in the case of certain activities, and particularly removals and the unloading of containers loaded with imported products. Furthermore, in practice, the average weight of loads is lower than 55 kg, except in the case of the lifting of sick persons and their transport on stretchers. With regard to the criteria applied by occupational physicians to conclude that a worker is fit for the manual transport of loads over 55 kg, account is taken of Order No. 1211-T of 19 March 1993, giving effect to section 5 of Order No. 34/CP of 23 February 1989, respecting minimum safety and health requirements for the manual transport of loads which constitute a risk for workers, and particularly to their backs and lumbar regions. In this respect, the Committee noted that section 3 above remained unchanged. The absolute limit is set at 105 kg, and a worker may even be permitted to carry regularly loads heavier than 55 kg if he has been found fit by the occupational physician. While noting the findings of the above survey, the Committee therefore requested the Government to indicate the measures which had been taken or were envisaged to ensure that workers could not be required to engage in the manual transport of a load heavier than 55 kg. Once again, the Committee referred to the ILO publication Maximum weight in lifting and carrying (Occupational Safety and Health Series, No. 59, Geneva, 1988), in which it is indicated that 55 kg is the limit recommended from the ergonomic point of view for the admissible weight of loads to be transported occasionally by a male worker between 19 and 45 years of age. Similarly, it states that 15 kg is the limit recommended from an ergonomic point of view for the admissible weight of loads to be transported occasionally by adult women. The Committee emphasizes that it has been raising this matter for many years. It therefore hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to give effect to the provisions of the Convention.

Articles 4 and 6. The Committee had noted the technical devices (trolleys, lifts, fixed or travelling cranes) used by workers depending on the financial means of the enterprise to limit or facilitate the manual transport of loads. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the application of this Article in practice.

Part V of the report form. The Committee notes the information provided concerning occupational accidents. The rate of occupational accidents related to the manual handling and transport of loads has remained relatively stable since 1995. In this respect, the Committee notes that 3 per cent of occupational accidents involved absence from work for over 24 hours and that the number of days for which benefits are paid by the CAFAT for this type of occupational accident remains stable but high, since they account for around 30 per cent of the total number of days for which benefits are paid in respect of occupational accidents. The Committee therefore requests the Government to continue providing information on the effect given in practice to the provisions respecting the maximum weight of loads which may be transported manually and, in particular, on the action taken to prevent this type of occupational accident.

The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures as soon as possible for the adoption of the above draft order and to ensure that this text reflects the points raised by the Committee in its comments and to provide effective protection for workers called upon to lift and transport loads manually.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.