CMNT_TITLE

Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155) - Netherlands (RATIFICATION: 1991)

Other comments on C155

Observation

Direct Request

2022
2015
1995

DISPLAYINEnglish - French - SpanishAlle anzeigen

The Committee notes the observations made by the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV), the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) and the Trade Union Federation of Professionals (VCP), as well as the joint observations made by the Confederation of Netherlands Industry and Employers (VNO–NCW) and the Royal Association of Dutch SME Entrepreneurs (MKB Netherlands), communicated by the Government with its report.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in relation to the effect given to the following Articles of the Convention: Articles 1(1), 4 and 8 (scope of application, national occupational safety and health (OSH) policy and the measures taken to give effect thereto, self-employed workers); Article 10 (measures to provide guidance to employers and workers, safety and health obligations); Article 17 (two or more undertakings engaged in activities simultaneously at one workplace); and Article 19(c) and (e) (information and consultation at the level of the undertaking).

Follow-up to the recommendations of the tripartite committee (representation made under article 24 of the Constitution of the ILO)

The Committee notes that the report of the tripartite committee set up to examine the representation alleging non-observance by the Netherlands of the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129), and the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution by the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV), the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) and the Trade Union Federation of Professionals (VCP) (formerly the Trade Union Confederation of Middle and Higher Level Employees’ Unions (MHP)) was adopted by the Governing Body at its 322nd Session (November 2014).

Articles 4, 7 and 8 of the Convention. Follow-up by the Government with the social partners to the issues raised in the representation under article 24 of the ILO Constitution, in the context of the review of the national policy. The Committee previously requested the Government, in accordance with the corresponding recommendations of the tripartite committee, to follow up on the issues discussed in the abovementioned representation in the context of the periodic review of the national OSH policy, and to provide information on the identification of major problems of coherence, the methods taken for dealing with them, and priorities for action. The Committee notes that the FNV, CNV and VCP indicate that they consider it to be most regrettable that the inspectorate unilaterally ended the periodic informal consultation with the trade unions about health and safety issues. For two years, there has been no joint consultation. Instead of the former periodic meetings and discussions, the inspectorate sent the draft of the annual programme for comments in mid-summer, during a period when many trade union representatives were on holiday. The Committee further notes the observations of the FNV, CNV and VCP that only one meeting with the Government had taken place to discuss the conclusions in the article 24 representation in April 2015 on the initiative of the Dutch trade union confederations, and that no tripartite meeting with the employers association has yet taken place.

In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that it will continue to involve the social partners in the formulation, implementation and periodical review of the national OSH policy, as it has done in the past. The Government indicated that, in 2012, the social partners represented in the Social and Economic Council (SER) unanimously supported the Dutch OSH system. The Government further indicates that periodic deliberations with the social partners in order to optimize the OSH policy and enforcement will be initiated this year, including on the annual labour inspection programme and the annual labour inspection report. Moreover, the recommendations in the report of the tripartite committee have already been discussed with the intention of further improvement of the performance of OSH policy and enforcement. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the concrete steps taken to continue to involve the social partners in the formulation, implementation and periodical review of the national OSH policy, and in particular to follow up on the issues discussed in the abovementioned representation.

Article 11(c). Notification of occupational diseases. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee considered in its report that there were shortcomings in the reporting of occupational diseases to the Netherlands Centre for Occupational Diseases (NCvB). The Committee therefore asked the Government, in its comment under Convention No. 81, to provide information on the outcome of the examination of the ways in which the system for the notification of occupational diseases can be improved and the actions taken as a result. In this regard, it notes the Government’s reference to a 2014 study which finds that the reasons for the under-reporting of occupational diseases to the NCvB include the lack of awareness, knowledge, experience or time of occupational physicians to determine and notify occupational diseases. The Government indicates that discussions will be held with the relevant stakeholders to see how to move ahead with the results of the study. The Government also refers to the proposed revision of the legislation on the occupational health-care system (expected to be introduced by July 2016), which provides that contracts between the employer and OSH services or occupational physicians must contain the explicit obligation to notify cases of occupational disease.

The Committee also notes from the Government’s report that there has been an increase from 2013 to 2014 in the number of cases of occupational disease reported (from 6,391 to 8,513). According to the Government, this increase is largely a result of investigations by the labour inspectorate concerning the reporting behaviour of occupational physicians. The FNV, CNV and VCP indicate that occupational physicians working for OSH services are contracted by employers, and therefore may be less likely to provide workers with information about an occupational disease which may lead to a claim against their employer. The trade unions also consider that employers rather than occupational physicians should be held responsible for reporting occupational diseases, based on the information provided to them by occupational physicians. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the examination of the ways in which the system for the notification of occupational diseases can be improved and the actions taken as a result, and their impact.