Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2015, Publication: 104th ILC session (2015)



A Government representative expressed the Government’s surprise and disappointment about the inclusion of the application of the Convention by Turkey in the list of individual cases discussed by the Committee, despite the decisive steps taken by the Government. With respect to legislation, a major overhaul of the occupational safety and health (OSH) system had taken place in 2012 with the enactment of the Occupational Safety and Health Act No. 6331 (OSH Act), which had been prepared in close consultation with the social partners, taking into consideration the relevant ILO Conventions and European Union directives. In addition, 36 implementing regulations and six communiqués had been issued. The new OSH legislation applied to all activities and workplaces in the public and private sectors, with limited categories of workers (armed forces and police, disaster and emergency activities, domestic services, self-employed persons, and prisoners receiving training under rehabilitation programmes) excluded from its scope. In order to apply the legislation effectively, social dialogue had been institutionalized through the establishment in 2005 of the National Occupational Safety and Health Council. He added that he had found it strange to hear comments about the insufficient frequency of meetings of the Council from trade union confederations that were not actively participating in it. The Council had adopted the Third National Occupational Safety and Health Policy Document and Action Plan for 2014–18, the objectives of which were: improving OSH activities, particularly in the agricultural and public sectors; reducing the number of accidents, especially in the metal, mining and construction sectors; improving statistics; determining the most common occupational diseases and collecting diagnostic data on them; and fostering a “safety culture”. The Government would communicate detailed information on the activities of the Council in its next report on the application of the Convention. The speaker then replied to questions raised by the Committee of Experts in its observations. Regarding the roles and responsibilities of employers and occupational safety experts, the OSH Act dedicated one chapter to this matter. With respect to activities conducted in the mining, metal and construction sectors, a project had been carried out between 2010 and 2012 to improve health and safety conditions in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in these sectors. There was also ongoing cooperation with the ILO to improve OSH in the mining and construction sectors. In this context, a National Tripartite Meeting on Improving Occupational Safety and Health in Mining had been organized in October 2014. This meeting had led to a technical assistance project being set up in January 2015, which aimed to develop a plan of action to improve working conditions in mining. As regards the functioning of the inspection system, the Labour Inspection Board was entrusted with verifying compliance with OSH legislation and carrying out inspections. The Board conducted at least two inspections every year targeting mine and construction workplaces. Annual reports on the Board’s activities were regularly communicated to the ILO in the context of reporting on the application of the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81). A series of legislative amendments had been adopted recently, covering the following matters: strengthening the authority and responsibilities of occupational physicians and occupational safety experts; introducing incentives and disincentives for enterprises with positive or negative OSH track records; consideration of OSH aspects in public procurement procedures; allowing pressure to overproduce to be deemed a legitimate reason for stopping work; working hours for miners to be limited to 37.5 hours weekly and 7.5 hours daily; and OSH matters to be part of compulsory curricula at certain universities. In addition, the duration of paid annual leave for miners had been increased by four days and the minimum wage for miners had been doubled. In order to promote a safety culture widely, various activities had been undertaken. They included: OSH guidelines for different sectors, a national campaign, and workshops and seminars to promote the OSH Act, training programmes for SMEs, and the development and dissemination of promotional materials (letters, booklets and advertisements). In addition, Turkey had hosted regional and international conferences, including the 19th World Congress on the Safety and Health at Work held, in September 2011 in Istanbul in cooperation with the ILO. In the last two years, Turkey had ratified the Safety and Health in Construction Convention, 1988 (No. 167), Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176) and the Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187), which symbolized the Government’s commitment to work on the matter. At the diplomatic level, Turkey had placed the issue of safer workplaces among the employment priorities of the Turkish presidency of the G20. In conclusion, the Government representative once again expressed his disappointment in the strongest terms at the inclusion of Turkey on the agenda of the Committee, despite the measures taken. The speaker considered that this decision was unfair and inconsistent. Nevertheless, the Government had taken this opportunity to explain recent developments, albeit in a limited amount of time. The speaker reiterated that the Government was committed to improving OSH conditions for the well-being of the people, and that it was also determined to continue its efforts towards effective implementation of legislation and a safety culture in society.

The Worker members expressed their appreciation for the Government’s determination to protect workers’ safety and health. Although this was the first time the Committee of Experts’ observations of Turkey’s compliance with the Convention had been discussed, it was particularly appropriate, after the major mine accident in Soma, which had exposed the country’s challenges regarding OSH. They proceeded to give statistical information from the National Statistical Institute regarding workplace accidents in general, as well as at the Soma and Ermenek mines. By ratifying Convention No. 155, as well as Conventions Nos 167 and No. 176, the Government had accepted the responsibility for establishing a safe working environment. While welcoming those ratifications, the Worker members considered that it was an appropriate response to the public outrage and pressure from the trade unions, and hoped that, together, they would take all necessary measures to bring laws and practice into compliance with the Convention. They also welcomed the tripartite consultations on OSH in mines, ILO technical assistance and the roadmap. The OSH Act had been adopted in 2012 and, while it could have been considered a step forward, there were still serious shortcomings since it excluded a large number of workers from its scope who were not covered by any other OSH regulations, and its applicability to public sector workers would only begin in July 2016. Section 13 of the Act elaborated a procedure to be followed when workers were exposed to serious and imminent danger, which could only be bypassed in the event of unavoidable danger, suggesting that an accident would occur before a worker could remove himself or herself. Workers should be allowed to remove themselves when they had reasonable justification to believe that the work situation presented an imminent and serious danger, whether an accident had occurred or not. Furthermore, although the Act provided for the establishment of OSH committees to ensure the joint liability of the main employer and subcontractors, the obligation would only arise when outsourcing contracts exceeded six months. Trade unions had not been sufficiently consulted in the development of legal measures and OSH policies and, therefore, successive action plans have been deeply flawed and ineffective. The National Action Plan 2014–18 did little more than repeat previous action plans that had failed to achieve their goals. The Government had failed to monitor workers’ health in order to detect and register occupational diseases, which was essential in developing appropriate OSH action. Although an adequate and appropriate system of inspection was also required to ensure the enforcement of OSH legislation, the already insufficient number of labour inspectors had been decreasing drastically and sanctions were not properly enforced. A major factor in the high number of workplace accidents was the increase in subcontractual employment arrangements which allowed employers to decrease direct labour costs and circumvent employment protection legislation. Labour inspections were inadequate and subcontracted workers were forced to work under unhealthy and insecure working conditions. Worker representatives played a key role in ensuring that effective OSH policies were adopted and implemented, and, therefore, along with employers, they were relied upon for the successful application of national OSH infrastructures. It was therefore important that they could exercise their right to freedom of association in an atmosphere free of violence and repression. As long as the Government had not taken sufficient measures in law, policy and practice to effectively implement the Convention, Turkish workers would continue to suffer.

The Employer members expressed their appreciation for the detailed information that the Government had provided. The tragedy in the Soma mine had been devastating, and health and safety of mine workers was important. However, in order to be fair and balanced, the Committee could not let one tragedy eclipse their discussion of national law and practice. Commendably, Turkey had ratified the main ILO OSH Conventions, and its inclusion on the Committee’s list of cases provided a constructive opportunity to discuss the measures it had been taking to implement Convention No. 155 in law and in practice, as discussion of cases on the list did not always entail a failure to implement a Convention. She recalled the 2010 observation of the Committee of Experts, which had requested information concerning measures to adopt a bill on OSH. Following that observation, the Government had adopted the OSH Act in 2012 and had enacted new policies and measures, including sanctions and penalties, in that respect. Under the Act, the National OSH Council, in which the social partners participated, had been developed and had adopted a new action plan that set safety targets for the next four-year period. In addition, in 2014, the Government had initiated a technical assistance project on OSH with ILO assistance and support from the social partners. An additional positive initiative was the October 2014 National Tripartite Meeting on Improving Occupational Safety and Health in Mining, which had included the participation of the ILO and the social partners and involved the adoption of a roadmap concerning improvements to OSH in mines, and which could apply to other industries. The Government had agreed that a research institution would carry out research on OSH in the context of subcontracting arrangements in certain high-risk sectors.

Turning to the concern that had been raised by the Committee of Experts in its 2014 observation with respect to the scope of the new Act, the Employer members encouraged the Government to continue to provide information to explain whether those exclusions existed and, if so, the rationale behind them. Noting the concerns regarding the participation of the social partners in the National OSH Council, they invited the Government to provide information to the Committee of Experts at its next session and stressed the importance of social dialogue to the goal of achieving full compliance with the Convention. With respect to the recruitment and role of occupational physicians and occupational safety experts (OSEs), they understood from the Government’s submission that it had provided a clarification concerning the different roles played by employers and OSEs, and that the Government had taken measures to strengthen occupational safety. They encouraged the Government to share information concerning that positive measure with the Committee of Experts. Regarding the Committee of Experts’ observations of deficiencies identified in the OSH system, the Employer members noted that the system was still being set up in the country and they encouraged the Government to continue its efforts, in consultation with the social partners. With respect to the concerns that had been raised regarding the establishment and application of procedures for notifying occupational accidents and diseases and producing statistics, the Employer members encouraged the Government to take measures, in consultation with the social partners, to improve its notification procedures and to provide the Committee of Experts with the statistics requested. To conclude, they welcomed the Government’s ongoing efforts, together with the social partners, to improve safety and health at work, as had been demonstrated at the National Tripartite Meeting to overcome gaps in application in practice. The positive measures taken by the Government should be highlighted, and the Employer members encouraged the Government to continue its efforts, in consultation with the social partner and to continue its long-standing collaboration with the ILO.

The Worker member of Turkey conveyed his condolences to the families of workers who had lost their lives in occupational accidents in Turkey. He welcomed the enactment and enforcement of the OSH Act which, apart from some exceptions, covered all workplaces and workers in both the private and public sectors. However, in view of the high number of workplace accidents, further steps needed to be taken. The number of OSEs was insufficient and their independence should be guaranteed. In addition, SMEs, which represented the majority of workplaces in Turkey, had limited resources and were facing challenges to implementing safety and health measures. The Government of Turkey should reconsider unionization and respect for workers’ rights, and awareness raising was vitally important for the efficient implementation of legislation. He invited the employers to adopt a human-based, sustainable approach by reviewing their position as regards OSH, so as not to consider it only as a cost issue. The lack of adequate diagnosis and treatment of occupational diseases was another issue to be solved urgently. Unemployment, undocumented work and subcontracting practices also intensified OSH challenges. The speaker underlined the importance of tripartism and social dialogue mechanisms in the area of OSH, and encouraged the Government to improve the inspection system and the collection of data regarding occupational accidents and diseases, with a view to taking a preventative approach.

The Employer member of Turkey recalled that Turkey was one of the countries which had ratified the main ILO OSH Conventions and, over the last 34 years, had been discussed 27 times by the Committee, demonstrating its commitment to align itself with ILO standards and to recognize its shortcomings. Turkey had been undergoing a reform process in OSH for years, which had to be considered as a case of progress in order to encourage further improvement. In 2003, a new Labour Code had been enacted in order to comply with European Union (EU) and ILO OSH standards. Turkey had also ratified both Convention No. 155 and the Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161), had established a National OSH Council, and had adopted its first national OSH policy document in 2006. To respond to implementation gaps, the capacity of the general directorate on OSH and the Turkish labour inspectorate had been improved. In 2012, Parliament had enacted a separate OSH Act, which was a milestone in the development of new policies and preventative measures, provided a sound legal basis for the National OSH Council, and introduced new sanctions and stronger administrative penalties. The enactment of the Act had been problematic and, accordingly, it had been amended four times. As indicated in the report of the Committee of Experts, a new initiative had begun in 2014, with ILO and social partner support, including a National Tripartite Meeting on Improving Occupational Safety and Health in Mining. This had led to an ILO technical assistance project on occupational safety and health, under which the ILO would facilitate national efforts to improve OSH in Turkey. The National OSH Council had adopted a new action plan which set out targets and activities for the next four years. The speaker explained the duties and functions of OSEs under the new Act, according to which, if an employer terminated the employment contract of an OSE on the grounds that the OSE had notified a possible occupational disease or emergency, the employer would pay compensation of at least one year’s salary of OSE or occupational physician in question. The problem in Turkey was not its legislation but the implementation thereof, which must be addressed with the necessary tools to strengthen the safety culture in society, such as through specific plans and measures to include OSH in all levels of education.

The Worker member of South Africa recalled the Soma tragedy and the lack of preventative measures taken. He said that the Government had decided that mining accidents were inevitable and had no will to confront them and take the appropriate measures. Most of the workers who had died in the Soma mine accident were subcontracted workers who were disproportionately employed in low-skilled and hazardous occupations and industries, and their employment created a downward pressure on wages, working conditions, safety and livelihoods. Labour inspections were rare in Turkey, but that situation was worse with respect to subcontracted workers owing to their unstable and disguised employment relationship. The Government needed to address the increase in subcontracting as part of the discussion around health and safety. South Africa also had a huge mining industry and the country continued to fight against casual labour. The speaker expressed his solidarity with the workers of Turkey and recommended immediate reforms by the Government to prevent further worker exploitation, giving due regard to the problem of subcontracted workers.

The Worker member of New Zealand expressed sympathy with Turkish workers in relation to OSH issues. There were a number of similarities between the situation in Turkey and that in New Zealand, which had also recently ratified Convention No. 155, and was undergoing a fundamental harmonization of its safety and health legislation, had also acted following a coal mining tragedy, and was also actively engaged in reviewing the regulations and rights concerned. The speaker congratulated the Turkish Government for its recent actions to try to address those issues, particularly by ratifying Conventions Nos 167 and 176. However, more could and should be done to protect workers. According to the Declaration of Philadelphia, a core part of the ILO’s mission was to provide “adequate protection for the life and health of workers in all occupations”. However, exemptions from the scope of application of the OSH Act compromised that fundamental right for certain groups of workers: public sector workers were denied access to occupational health services under exemptions contained in sections 6 and 7 of the OSH Act until July 2016, which should be removed as a matter of urgency; and “own-account contractors” were further excluded from the Act’s scope. Considering that the Act could encourage disguised forms of employment, the Government should expand the scope of application of the OSH Act to cover “own-account contractors”. The Government had taken many measures regarding those issues; however, as the Committee of Experts had emphasized on several occasions, OSH required a dynamic ongoing process.

An observer of the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) recalled that, in 2005, Turkey had ratified both Convention No. 155 and the Occupational Safety and Health (Dock Work) Convention, 1979 (No. 152). However, since then, the Government had failed to fully bring its laws and practices into line with those Conventions, particularly in Turkish ports. Dock workers were exposed to significant workplace hazards, such as the use of unsuitable surfaces for crane operations, and did not have adequate personal protective equipment available to them, which was the most basic of safety requirements. Heavy congestion in ports not only led to traffic accidents but also increased exposure to carbon monoxide. The speaker cited statistics from 2012 concerning fatal accidents in Turkish ports, as well as cases of permanent disability, injuries, and occupational disease diagnoses. Those statistics were high, despite the fact that they excluded informal and precarious workers, who made up a large proportion of the country’s port labour force. Labour inspection in Turkish ports also remained a critical issue, as there were not enough qualified labour inspectors conducting port inspections. In terms of penalties, the fines levied against employers were not sufficiently dissuasive. In that regard, the Government needed to consider the Committee of Experts’ observations in relation to the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), and take appropriate remedies. In addition, Worker representatives on port OSH committees did not receive adequate training to fulfil their duties, and existing OSH policies were not communicated to workers in an understandable manner. Ports-specific OSH measures were needed with the aim of reducing the incidence of fatal occupational accidents and enhancing safety standards. Those measures should deal, among other things, with the handling of dangerous goods, protective equipment and clothing, and container transport procedures. The Government’s recent ratification of Conventions Nos 167 and 176 and the subsequent introduction of OSH measures for the mining and construction sectors were encouraging initiatives which might possibly pave the way for sector-specific OSH measures in ports. The speaker encouraged the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance in that regard.

An observer representing Public Services International (PSI) said that the Government had not satisfied its responsibilities with respect to the OSH working conditions of public workers in Turkey. Not only were public sector employees temporarily excluded from the application of the OSH Act until July 2016, but “own-account contractors” were permanently excluded. The Act would encourage disguised forms of employment. In the public sector, there was no obligation to keep statistics related to occupational injuries and diseases, in violation of Article 11 of the Convention. A civil servant exercising the right not to work, in application of the OSH Act, could still be sanctioned under sections 26 and 125 of the State Servants Act 657. Violence against civil servants employed in various sectors, including health and education, should be addressed within the scope of OSH as some of those workers were deprived of protective measures despite their vulnerability when faced with violence. The health system was critically underfunded, with increasing proportions of precarious and outsourced workers amounting to a de facto privatization of public health institutions, which directly impacted the quality of care and services provided. She expressed concern over the privatization of the management of OSH systems, as the independence of inspectors could not possibly be ensured if they were paid by the same employers who refused to invest in safe working conditions for their workers. Moreover, it was not just management systems for OSH that were at risk of privatization, because the modalities of the management influenced the content of the OSH delivered. Full participation by the social partners in the definition, implementation and management of OSH was essential to improving working conditions and preventing deaths and injuries. She underlined the urgency for the ILO to develop a standard on the management of OSH.

The Government representative said that he had taken careful note of all the constructive criticisms expressed by the Committee, although he still disagreed with the decision to include it in the list of cases. Nevertheless, he was pleased to hear that improvements in Turkey regarding OSH had been acknowledged by the majority of Worker and Employer representatives. Concerning the Soma mine accident, 16 programmed and non-programmed inspections with regard to OSH had been carried out by labour inspectors over the past four years and the mine had been closed down by the Ministry. The accident had occurred as a result of the employer’s negligence, and sanctions had been imposed as provided for in legislation. He recalled that mine workers were represented by one of the strongest trade unions in Turkey, and stressed that the active involvement of employers and workers was necessary to ensure effective workplace safety. Employers, trade unions and workers should also act responsibly to keep the working environment safe and healthy, and they should help the relevant authorities in the discharge of their duties and in the continuous application of measures taken. With respect to the social security benefits provided to those affected by accidents in mines, in addition to the general provisions of social security legislation, some specific arrangements had been made by two new laws, under which any debts of the deceased miners owed to the social security institution had been revoked and their survivors were accorded the right to receive survivors’ pensions regardless of whether they fulfilled the required conditions. With respect to the Ermenek mine accident, there had been ten inspections since 2009, when the work had begun. Judicial processes were under way in both the Soma and Ermenek cases. The Ministry’s labour inspectorate had conducted two programmed inspections every year at each of the mines, and non-programmed inspections were also carried out when complaints were received. In cases of violations of the law, either an administrative fine was imposed or, when danger to life existed, operations at the workplace were stopped. During the first five months of 2015, 433 mine workplaces had been inspected and, in 82 cases, their operations had been stopped, while in 236 cases administrative fines had been levied.

The Convention did not prohibit subcontracting. Subcontractors, like main contractors, were responsible for ensuring a safe and healthy working environment and must abide by the provisions of relevant legislation. The main contractors were jointly responsible for ensuring compliance with the law. Concerning collaboration between the main contractor and the subcontractor, section 22 of the OSH Act required the establishment of OSH committees in workplaces where subcontracting continued for more than six months. The requirement for collaboration and coordination of safety and health activities among several employers sharing one workplace was not conditional upon the duration of the work; rather, it must be fulfilled in all cases under section 23 of the Act. On the right of workers to remove themselves in cases of serious and imminent danger, section 13 of the Act did not preclude such action, where serious and imminent danger was deemed unavoidable in the opinion of the worker concerned. With regard to the number of hospitals that were authorized to diagnose occupational diseases, he clarified that, despite reports of there being only three such hospitals, that number had been increased to 129. Similarly, the number of occupational safety experts had increased from 8,665 (before the Act had entered into force) to 106,000, and the number of occupational physicians had increased from 8,446 (before the Act had entered into force) to 26,000. Concerning the rate of accidents in Turkey, statistics only covered wage earners, among whom accident rates were relatively high. If public employees and “own-account contractors” were included, the accident rate would be much lower. There was a constant decrease in the rate of fatal occupational accidents in the country. Regarding the number of inspections, he said that inspection figures would be provided in a written report but further reported that, in 2014, there had been 5,087 programmed inspections and 5,042 non-programmed inspections. In the construction sector, the Labour Inspection Board had carried out a special inspection in 45 provinces with more than 300 inspectors in October 2014, during which 2,087 construction sites had been inspected and operations had been stopped in four out of five workplaces. That rate, nearly 80 per cent, indicated that there was much to be done with regard to raising awareness among employers and workers. In 2014, a total of 3,625 construction sites had been inspected and 1,858 shut down. The total amount of administrative fines levied was more than 27 million liras, that is. US$10 million. Statistics and data collection on occupational diseases for civil servants would be undertaken in line with the decision made by the National OSH Council and taking place and through action plans. Turkey continued to improve its legislation and had achieved enormous progress during the last decade. It attached great importance to the participation and active involvement of the social partners, civil society and universities, even though some of those partners had not participated in the process of drafting legislation or in the National OSH Council’s meetings. He stressed that Turkey had exerted enormous efforts in recent years in order to ensure that all workers were employed in safer and healthier workplaces and would continue to do so for the well-being of its citizens.

The Employer members thanked the Government for its efforts to respond to the concerns that had been raised. The discussion had provided an opportunity to positively note the measures that the Government had taken to comply with the Convention in law and in practice, in consultation with the social partners and, where applicable, with the ILO. They expressed their appreciation for the measures taken to bring legislation, practice and safety culture into line with the Convention, and encouraged the Government to continue to report to the Committee of Experts on the measures it had taken in that regard. They further encouraged the Government to continue to work with the social partners in those efforts.

The Worker members stated that the ratification of Conventions Nos 167 and 176 was an important step, taken together with the social partners, particularly given that construction and mining were the most dangerous sectors for workers. The Worker members agreed with the Employer members’ statement that the Soma tragedy should not eclipse discussions and that overall progress and increased efforts should also be mentioned. The statistics provided by the Turkish Statistical Institute were evidence that the Government’s measures had not been sufficiently effective to prevent disastrous accidents and, therefore, certain issues should be taken up with the social partners to address the situation of workers exposed to serious and imminent danger, who were not permitted to withdraw without the consent of the employer, as well as “own-account workers” and public sector workers who were excluded from the scope of the Act. The Government had not replied to questions raised regarding the increased vulnerability of subcontracted workers, who were only covered by OSH measures if their contract exceeded six months, nor had it provided information on the number of workers excluded under the Act. The Worker members proposed that the Government: (i) revise the OSH Act in order to bring it into compliance with the Convention; (ii) assess the effectiveness of measures undertaken as part of the national action plan to increase workplace safety; (iii) improve record-keeping and monitoring systems concerning OSH; (iv) increase the number of labour inspections and ensure that dissuasive sanctions would be imposed for infractions, particularly those involving subcontractors; and (v) refrain from interfering violently in trade union activities addressing health and safety deficits, and instead engage in genuine dialogue with all social partners. Finally, they urged the Government to present its report on the Convention to the Committee of Experts and to continue to avail itself of ILO technical assistance.

Conclusions

The Committee noted the detailed oral information provided by the Government representative on the issues raised by the Committee of Experts and the discussion that ensued relating to: ensuring that occupational safety and health (OSH) legislation applied to all workplaces covered by the Convention; the need to improve the functioning of the National OSH Council, including effective representation and consultation of the social partners; the need to improve inter-ministerial coordination on OSH issues; clarifying the roles and responsibilities of employers and occupational safety experts (OSEs) and ensuring workplace safety; the need to periodically review the OSH situation with particular attention to subcontracting and the mining, metal and construction sectors; strengthening labour inspection, particularly with respect to the various forms of precarious work, and ensuring the effective application of penalties; improving and ensuring the application in practice of procedures established for the notification of occupational accidents and diseases, and the production of annual statistics; ensuring that workers can remove themselves from situations of serious and imminent danger without suffering undue consequences; and ensuring collaboration on OSH between two or more undertakings engaging in activities simultaneously at one workplace.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government representative on the adoption of the Third National Occupational Health and Safety Policy Document and Action Plan for 2014–18 by the tripartite National Occupational Health and Safety Council. This Action Plan included the objectives of: improving the quality of OSH activities; reducing the number of accidents in the metal, mining and construction sectors; intensifying OSH activities for agriculture and public sectors; disseminating a safety culture; improving the collection of statistics on work accidents and occupational diseases as well as diagnostic data; and providing hospitals with the infrastructure necessary to diagnose occupational diseases. In this regard, the Government indicated that a workshop with the relevant stakeholders had been held in May 2015 in order to identify a roadmap for improving the collection and dissemination of data on OSH. Moreover, amendments to the Occupational Safety and Health Act No. 6331 had been adopted in April 2015 to: strengthen the applicable administrative fines; clarify the authority and responsibility of workplace physicians and OSEs; add incentives for enterprises with good OSH records; include OSH obligations in public procurement and prohibit mining companies that had experienced fatal work accidents from public procurement for two years; specify that pressure for overproduction could be a reason for suspending work; limit the maximum hours of work for miners; and introduce OSH as a compulsory curricula component in relevant educational programmes. The Government indicated it was implementing several awareness raising measures aimed at developing a preventative culture of safety and health, including by disseminating information on the new legislation. Other measures taken included the ratification of the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176) and the Safety and Health in Construction Convention, 1988 (No. 167) in March 2015. The Government further indicated that it was cooperating with the ILO on a project that aimed to develop a tripartite roadmap for improving occupational safety and health, particularly in the mining and construction sectors, in line with international commitments under relevant ILO labour standards. The Government provided information on the number of labour inspections undertaken, including sectoral inspections, administrative fines imposed and stop orders issued.

The Committee welcomed the ongoing efforts made by the Government and the social partners to improve safety and health at work and the intention to overcome the issues identified in a comprehensive and sustained way, with the support of the Office.

Taking into account the discussion, the Committee requested the Government to:

• ensure that the Occupational Safety and Health Act is in compliance with Convention No. 155, in particular with respect to its coverage and in ensuring the right of workers to withdraw themselves from serious and imminent danger;
• assess the effectiveness of the measures undertaken in the context of the National Action Plan aimed at increasing workplace safety;
• improve record keeping and monitoring systems concerning health and safety, including occupational diseases;
• increase the number of labour inspections and ensure that dissuasive sanctions are imposed for infractions of laws and regulations, in particular with respect to subcontractors;
• refrain from interfering violently in lawful, peaceful and legitimate trade union activities addressing health and safety concerns; and
• engage in genuine dialogue with all social partners.

The Committee urged the Government to present its report on the Convention to the Committee of Experts this year, and to continue to avail itself of ILO technical assistance.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s latest report, the attached comments by the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TÜRK-İŞ) and the Turkish Confederation of Employer Associations (TİSK), and the comments submitted on 1 September 2009 by the International Trade Union Confederation on behalf of TÜRK-İŞ, which indicate that the draft bill on occupational safety and health (OSH) has not yet been adopted. The Committee further notes that the Government has provided information which appears to give further effect to Articles 7 and 11(b) and (f) of the Convention. The Committee hopes that the proposed legislation will be adopted soon and asks the Government to provide a copy of the relevant legislation, once adopted, indicating the specific provisions that give effect to Articles 1(2) and 2(2) on the scope of application; Article 5(b) on relationships between the material elements of work and the persons who carry out or supervise the work; Articles 5(d) and 19(b) on communication and cooperation at the level of the undertaking; Articles 13 and 19(f) on the right to removal; Article 17 on collaboration between two or more undertakings engaged in activities simultaneously at one workplace; and Article 19(e) on the right of workers or their representatives to inquire into, and be consulted by the employer on all aspects of OSH associated with their work.

Article 12(b) of the Convention. Measures to make available information and undertake studies concerning the correct installation and use of equipment and the correct use of substances. The Government indicates that there are provisions in place regarding the information to be provided by producing or supplying companies, and that it would be useful to receive the text of the machinery safety regulations from the Ministry of Industry and Commerce. The Committee reiterates its request that the Government supply the text of the abovementioned regulations, and to indicate the specific provisions that ensure that those who design, manufacture, import, provide or transport machinery, equipment or substances for occupational use, make available information concerning correct installation and use, and information on hazards and instructions on the way these are to be avoided, as required by Article 12(b).

Article 18. Measures to deal with emergencies, accidents and first-aid arrangements. In its comments, TİSK raises their concerns regarding the Government’s intention to abolish the current threshold of 50 workers when requiring enterprises to employ one or more physicians and set up a health unit as they fear that this will result in heavier burdens on employers in small and medium-sized enterprises and may encourage enterprises to engage in undeclared employment. The Committee refers the Government to paragraphs 181–191 of its 2009 General Survey on occupational safety and health for further information on the application of Article 18, which may vary depending on the size and activity of the undertaking. The Committee asks the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to ensure full effect is given to this Article of the Convention in enterprises that employ less than 50 persons.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee welcomes the information provided by the Government on the projects undertaken to ensure the harmonization of the administrative records of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, and affiliated and related institutions, with the national and European definitions, classifications and standards, and for the improvement of the statistical system in Turkey. The Committee also notes the comments which indicates a 12 per cent decrease in the number of workplace accidents between 2005 and 2007 as a result of increasing countrywide effectiveness of OSH services. The Committee further notes the comments submitted by TÜRK-İŞ indicating that a new OSH policy document has been adopted by the National Health and Safety Council for 2009–13. TÜRK-İŞ alleges, however, that there are still shortcomings in OSH measures in practice as far as subcontracting is concerned. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to address the application of the Convention to subcontracted workers; to provide a copy of the 2009–13 OSH policy document; and to continue to provide information on the application of this Convention in practice, with particular reference to ongoing activities under the National Pneumoconiosis Prevention Action Plan.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

Further to its observation, the Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee notes with interest the information regarding the new draft Bill on Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) due to be adopted soon. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would keep the Committee updated on any progress in this respect, and to transmit a copy of this law to the Office as soon as it has been adopted.

Article 1, paragraph 2, and Article 2, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Scope of application. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that some categories of workplaces and workers are at present excluded from the application of the Convention, but that the scope of application of the new draft Bill will include all branches of economic activity and all the workers therein. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress in this respect.

Article 5, subparagraph (b). Relationships between the material elements of work and the persons who carry out or supervise the work. The Committee notes the provisions of the Regulation on OSH, requiring the employer to observe the relationships between the material elements of work and the workers by adapting the work to the individual. The Committee requests the Government to provide additional information on how this Article is applied in practice.

Article 5, subparagraph (d), and Article 19, subparagraph (b). Communication and cooperation at the level of the undertaking. The Committee notes the requirements for the establishment of OSH Boards in undertakings with more than 50 employees and section 11 of the Regulation on Occupational Health and Safety which provides for the right of employees or their representatives to make proposals and participate in negotiations as regards OSH. The Committee requests the Government to supply additional information on and to provide clarifications as to the state and structure of communication and cooperation within undertakings that employ less than 50 persons.

Article 7. Periodical review of the situation regarding occupational safety and health. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that it is the responsibility of the National Council of OSH (NCOHS) and its working groups to periodically review the situation regarding occupational health and safety. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide further details regarding the frequency of the reviews and the substantive issues discussed in the Working Groups of NCOHS.

Article 11, subparagraph (b). The determination of work processes and of substances and agents, the exposure to which is to be prohibited, limited or made subject to authorization or control by the competent authority. The Government indicates in its report that legislation has been adopted which calls for risk assessment of hazardous substances used in the workplaces in order to determine measures to be taken with a view to protect the safety and health of the workers. It also indicates the setting up of limit values on the various chemical substances and the control and analysis of the information concerning the substances to be imported into the country is also performed by customs administration. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the existence of mechanisms for identifying hazardous work processes and for examining health hazards due to simultaneous exposure to several substances.

Article 11, subparagraph (f). Systems to examine chemical, physical and biological agents in respect of the risk to the health of workers. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the creation of the Working Group for the Action Plan of Prevention of Pneumoconiosis aiming at the elimination of asbestos from the workplaces. The Committee requests the Government to submit additional information on the work of the Working Group, including any practical outcomes from their work.

Article 12, subparagraph (b). Measures to make available information and undertake studies concerning the correct installation and use of equipment and the correct use of substances. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that this Article of the Convention had been implemented through the Regulation on Machine Security, but that this text is unavailable to the Committee. The Committee requests the Government to supply the text of the Regulation and to provide further information on how effect is given to this Article in law and in practice.

Article 13 and Article 19, subparagraph (f). Right to removal. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that effect is given to these two provisions of the Convention through section 83 of the Labour Act No. 4857. The Committee notes however, that section 83 provides that the workers’ rights in this context are limited to making “an application to the occupational safety and health board with a request for the determination of the case and a decision for the adoption of necessary measures”. Although, in practice, workers that are faced with a serious and imminent danger will have to stop work in order to submit the required application, section 83 does not, as Article 13 requires, entitle the worker to take an independent decision to stop work. On the contrary, it specifically provides that the decision lies with the OSH Board. This provision does not either restrict the employers from requiring the worker to go back to work as required in Article 19(f). Furthermore, section 83 does not offer workers the required protection from undue consequences as it provides that the workers’ “wages and other rights shall be reserved during the period he refrains from working”. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure compliance with Articles 13 and 19(f) of the Convention and to keep the Office informed of any developments in this respect.

Article 17. Collaboration in complying with the requirements of the Convention when two or more undertakings engage in activities simultaneously at one workplace. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that this Article of the Convention is applied through section 2 of the Labour Act No. 4857 which provides that in a “principal employer – subcontractor relationship” the principal employer shall be jointly liable with the subcontractor for the obligations ensuing from the Labour Act; the Regulation on Health and Safety in Constructive Works, (2003) and the provisions in section 17, Regulation on Duties of Workplace Health Services and Workplace Physicians and their Employment Principles and Procedures. The Committee requests the Government to supply additional information on and to clarify the situation where two “same level” enterprises collaborate in the same workplace and provide information as to whether the provisions cover all workplaces notwithstanding the number of personnel employed.

Article 18. Measures to deal with emergencies, accidents and first-aid arrangements. The Committee notes that section 81 of Labour Act No. 4857 provides that, in establishments where a minimum of 50 employers are employed, the employer is obliged to employ one or more physicians at the establishment and set up a health unit with a view to protect the health of the employees, to take OSH measures and to provide first aid, urgent treatment and preventive health services depending on the number of employees and the risk factors involved. It also notes the adoption of the Regulation on Duties of Workplace Health Services and Workplace Physicians and their Employment Principles and Procedures (2003) and Regulation on the Amendment of the Regulation on First Aid (2004). The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on how this Article of the Convention is applied in undertakings that employ less than 50 persons.

Article 19, subparagraph (e). Arrangements at the level of the undertaking ensuring suitable conditions for consultations between the employer, the workers and their representatives or representative organizations. The Committee notes that article 11 of the Regulation on OSH, provides for the employer to ask the views of employees or representatives concerning OSH, vest them with the right to make proposals and ensure that they participate in negotiations, while the representatives of workers who have special tasks regarding OSH may make proposals and request the employer to take necessary measures. However, the Committee notes that the Regulation on OSH was annulled on 16 May 2006. The Committee kindly requests the Government to provide information as to the application of this Article of the Convention in law and in practice after the annulment of the abovementioned Regulation.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide copies of the labour inspection reports carried out in accordance with Labour Act No. 4857 and the relevant regulations, as well as the reports of the other inspections on projects, industrial injuries and occupational diseases, complaints, establishment permits that the Government mentions in the report. It also requests the Government to supply the Committee with the annual statistics issued by the Social Insurance Institution, as well as information of the progress on the improving and modernizing of the statistical system. Finally it requests the Government to indicate progress in relation to the numerical targets set for the reduction of industrial injuries in the National Policy Document on Occupational Health and Safety (2006–08).

Part VI of the report form. Consultations held. The Committee requests the Government to supply the observations by the Turkish Confederation of Employers’ Associations (TÌSK) referred to in, but not attached to, the Government’s report.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes the observations submitted on 2 September 2009 by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on behalf of the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TÜRK-İŞ) concerning the application of the Convention transmitted to the Government on 2 October 2009. The Committee hopes that the next report that will be supplied by the Government for examination by the Committee will contain a response to these observations.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee notes with interest the information regarding the new draft Bill on Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) due to be adopted soon. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would keep the Committee updated on any progress in this respect, and to transmit a copy of this law to the Office as soon as it has been adopted.

Articles 1(2) and 2(2) of the Convention. Scope of application. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that some categories of workplaces and workers are at present excluded from the application of the Convention, but that the scope of application of the new draft Bill will include all branches of economic activity and all the workers therein. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress in this respect.

Article 5(b). Relationships between the material elements of work and the persons who carry out or supervise the work. The Committee notes the provisions of the Regulation on OSH, requiring the employer to observe the relationships between the material elements of work and the workers by adapting the work to the individual. The Committee requests the Government to provide additional information on how this Article is applied in practice.

Articles 5(d) and 19(b). Communication and cooperation at the level of the undertaking. The Committee notes the requirements for the establishment of OSH Boards in undertakings with more than 50 employees and section 11 of the Regulation on Occupational Health and Safety which provides for the right of employees or their representatives to make proposals and participate in negotiations as regards OSH. The Committee requests the Government to supply additional information on and to provide clarifications as to the state and structure of communication and cooperation within undertakings that employ less than 50 persons.

Article 7. Periodical review of the situation regarding occupational safety and health. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that it is the responsibility of the National Council of OSH (NCOHS) and its working groups to periodically review the situation regarding occupational health and safety. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide further details regarding the frequency of the reviews and the substantive issues discussed in the Working Groups of NCOHS.

Article 11(b). The determination of work processes and of substances and agents, the exposure to which is to be prohibited, limited or made subject to authorization or control by the competent authority. The Government indicates in its report that legislation has been adopted which calls for risk assessment of hazardous substances used in the workplaces in order to determine measures to be taken with a view to protect the safety and health of the workers. It also indicates the setting up of limit values on the various chemical substances and the control and analysis of the information concerning the substances to be imported into the country is also performed by customs administration. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the existence of mechanisms for identifying hazardous work processes and for examining health hazards due to simultaneous exposure to several substances.

Article 11(f). Systems to examine chemical, physical and biological agents in respect of the risk to the health of workers. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the creation of the Working Group for the Action Plan of Prevention of Pneumoconiosis aiming at the elimination of asbestos from the workplaces. The Committee requests the Government to submit additional information on the work of the Working Group, including any practical outcomes from their work.

Article 12(b). Measures to make available information and undertake studies concerning the correct installation and use of equipment and the correct use of substances. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that this Article of the Convention had been implemented through the Regulation on Machine Security, but that this text is unavailable to the Committee. The Committee requests the Government to supply the text of the Regulation and to provide further information on how effect is given to this Article in law and in practice.

Articles 13 and 19(f). Right to removal. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that effect is given to these two provisions of the Convention through section 83 of the Labour Act No. 4857. The Committee notes however, that section 83 provides that the workers’ rights in this context are limited to making “an application to the occupational safety and health board with a request for the determination of the case and a decision for the adoption of necessary measures”. Although, in practice, workers that are faced with a serious and imminent danger will have to stop work in order to submit the required application, section 83 does not, as Article 13 requires, entitle the worker to take an independent decision to stop work. On the contrary, it specifically provides that the decision lies with the OSH Board. This provision does not either restrict the employers from requiring the worker to go back to work as required in Article 19(f). Furthermore, section 83 does not offer workers the required protection from undue consequences as it provides that the workers’ “wages and other rights shall be reserved during the period he refrains from working”. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure compliance with Articles 13 and 19(f) of the Convention and to keep the Office informed of any developments in this respect.

Article 17. Collaboration in complying with the requirements of the Convention when two or more undertakings engage in activities simultaneously at one workplace. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that this Article of the Convention is applied through section 2 of the Labour Act No. 4857 which provides that in a “principal employer – subcontractor relationship” the principal employer shall be jointly liable with the subcontractor for the obligations ensuing from the Labour Act; the Regulation on Health and Safety in Constructive Works, (2003) and the provisions in section 17, Regulation on Duties of Workplace Health Services and Workplace Physicians and their Employment Principles and Procedures. The Committee requests the Government to supply additional information on and to clarify the situation where two “same level” enterprises collaborate in the same workplace and provide information as to whether the provisions cover all workplaces notwithstanding the number of personnel employed.

Article 18. Measures to deal with emergencies, accidents and first-aid arrangements. The Committee notes that section 81 of Labour Act No. 4857 provides that, in establishments where a minimum of 50 employers are employed, the employer is obliged to employ one or more physicians at the establishment and set up a health unit with a view to protect the health of the employees, to take OSH measures and to provide first aid, urgent treatment and preventive health services depending on the number of employees and the risk factors involved. It also notes the adoption of the Regulation on Duties of Workplace Health Services and Workplace Physicians and their Employment Principles and Procedures (2003) and Regulation on the Amendment of the Regulation on First Aid (2004). The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on how this Article of the Convention is applied in undertakings that employ less than 50 persons.

Article 19(e). Arrangements at the level of the undertaking ensuring suitable conditions for consultations between the employer, the workers and their representatives or representative organizations. The Committee notes that article 11 of the Regulation on OSH, provides for the employer to ask the views of employees or representatives concerning OSH, vest them with the right to make proposals and ensure that they participate in negotiations, while the representatives of workers who have special tasks regarding OSH may make proposals and request the employer to take necessary measures. However, the Committee notes that the Regulation on OSH was annulled on 16 May 2006. The Committee kindly requests the Government to provide information as to the application of this Article of the Convention in law and in practice after the annulment of the abovementioned Regulation.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide copies of the labour inspection reports carried out in accordance with Labour Act No. 4857 and the relevant regulations, as well as the reports of the other inspections on projects, industrial injuries and occupational diseases, complaints, establishment permits that the Government mentions in the report. It also requests the Government to supply the Committee with the annual statistics issued by the Social Insurance Institution, as well as information of the progress on the improving and modernizing of the statistical system. Finally it requests the Government to indicate progress in relation to the numerical targets set for the reduction of industrial injuries in the National Policy Document on Occupational Health and Safety (2006–08).

Part VI of the report form. Consultations held. The Committee requests the Government to supply the observations by the Turkish Confederation of Employers’ Associations (TÌSK) referred to in, but not attached to, the Government’s report.