EU Sectoral Social Dialogue on Occupational Health and Safety – Patterns of Cooperation and Cases

Mathias MaucherPolicy Officer “Health and Social Services” – EPSU

Elisa BenedettiPolicy Officer - HOSPEEM

European Commission / TAIEXMulti-country Workshop on Developing Systems for Occupational

Health and Safety Through Social DialogueBrussels

18 February 2013

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

Framework Agreement on the prevention of sharps injuries (I)

• 6 June 2006: EP Resolution “Healthcare workers and blood-borne 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 Seminaro with financial and organisational support of European Commission

(EC)o with presentation of case studies from various countrieso 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) agreeso to adjourn, for the time of social partner’s negotiation, own

legislative proposalo 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 theprevention 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 theprevention 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-raisingo 4) Trainingo 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 EU-legislation 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 groundo Recurrent issue on agenda of Sectoral Social Dialogue

Committee for the Hospital Sector to check for follow-upo 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 involvedoFramework Agreement: possibility to review its application 5 years

lateroClause 11 on the implementation of Directive 2010/32/EUAims: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 resultsDd

Main steps:oSurveyoEvents: 3 regional seminars (Ireland, Austria, Italy) + Final conference (Spain)oDeliverables 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))

Transposition prior to May 2013: DK, LV

Transposition likely by deadline: SF, UK

No clear date given: CY, EE, ES

Progress towards

transposition of

legislation (deadline

May 2013)...

(source: GHK survey, 2013)

Nature of transposition

Legislation only: CY, DK, ES, SE, SF, UK

Legislation and collective agreement: Belarus, Latvia

Collective agreement

Other method of transposition: NL (Incorporated in existing Guideline)

Directive likely to be transposed

as...

(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 cutso 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 mmaucher@epsu.orgo www.epsu.org

• Elisa Benedetti – HOSPEEM (European Hospital and Healthcare Employers’ Association)

o hospeem@hospeem.euo http://hospeem.org