ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Comments

CMNT_TITLE

Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115) - Finland (RATIFICATION: 1978)

Other comments on C115

Observation
  1. 2010
  2. 1995
  3. 1992
Direct Request
  1. 2022
  2. 2016
  3. 2005
  4. 2000
  5. 1995
  6. 1992

DISPLAYINEnglish - French - SpanishAlle anzeigen

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report.

1. Article 7, paragraph 1(b) and paragraph 2, of the Convention. Dose limits. With respect to the maximum annual dose for the lens of the eye of young workers in the age group of 16 to 18 years in the course of their vocational training, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that this dose limit is now three-tenths of the annual dose limit, which is in conformity with the Convention. However, it notes that the references made by the Government to Act No. 418 and Act No. 727 of 2002 amending the Radiation Act (Act No. 592 of 1991) do not concern annual dose limits. Noting that section 4 of the Radiation Ordinance (No. 1512 of 1991) prescribes an annual dose limit of 50 mSv for the lens of the eye for this category of workers, the Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the amending text to section 4 of the Radiation Ordinance (No. 1512 of 1991) with its next report to ensure the full application of the Convention.

2. Article 14. Alternative employment or other measures offered for maintaining income where continued assignment to work involving exposure is medically inadvisable. With respect to job security for those workers who have accumulated an effective dose beyond the occupational exposure limits established in the national legislation and the concern expressed by the Committee previously, it notes the Government’s statement that Chapter 7, sections 3 and 4, of the Employment Contracts Act (Act No. 55 of 2001), enumerate the permissible grounds for dismissal when work has declined considerably or permanently on financial or productivity related reasons and the dismissal shall not precede or follow the hiring of a new employee to a similar task. It notes that similar regulations apply to the public sector (Act No. 750 of 1994 and Act No. 304 of 2003). The Committee notes from the Government’s report under the Employment Service Convention, 1948 (No. 88), that any worker who has been employed for a period of three years and is dismissed for the reasons mentioned above would automatically be covered by the redundancy protection policy. In this context, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to paragraph 32 of the 1992 general observation under the Convention where it is indicated that every effort must be made to provide the workers concerned with suitable alternative employment, or to maintain their income through social security measures or otherwise where continued assignment to work involving exposure to ionizing radiations is found to be medically inadvisable. Against this background, the Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the practical application of this Article including information on the situation of workers who have been employed for less than three years.

3. Part III of the report form. National Authority. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority is currently revising existing guidelines and regulations with respect to workers involved in ionizing radiation work. It also notes the statement that this Authority is also preparing further instructions regarding protection of workers from ionizing radiation. It requests the Government to provide detailed information on measures taken or envisaged by the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority in respect of the protection of workers engaged in ionizing radiation work and to provide copies of any adopted regulations, guidelines and instructions.

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer