CMNT_TITLE

Occupational Safety and Health (Dock Work) Convention, 1979 (No. 152) - Finland (RATIFICATION: 1981)

1. Further to its previous observation concerning earlier comments made by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK), the Committee notes the information that inspection systems at ports and industrial workplaces have been subject to reform. It notes that dock work inspections and the qualifications required of persons performing them have been revised, on the basis of proposals drawn up following tripartite negotiations, and that the revised competence requirements contained in Decisions 744/1986 and 341/1998 entered into force on 1 June 1998.

The Committee notes the comments made by the SAK, communicated by the Government, in which it states that the reliability of lifting device inspections should be improved. It indicates that accidents and near-miss cases have occurred even when a ship's lifting appliances had been inspected according to the attestations and were in good condition. Likewise, the loose lifting gear, cables and belts forming part of a ship's equipment have often proved to have lifting straps unfit for this purpose, even when they had supposedly been properly inspected. The SAK added that the application of several different safety regulations (concerning road, rail and sea transport) may also cause dangerous situations and reduce safety. In addition the SAK states that dock work involves employees of several different employers and the numbers of actors at ports has increased. Cooperation between the different actors occasionally suffers from problems and friction which may affect employee safety and health.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on these comments made by the SAK and on any improvement resulting from the recent reforms introduced in the inspection services at ports.

2. The Committee notes the comments made by the SAK, communicated by the Government, in which the SAK states that it has been difficult to obtain statistical data on occupational accidents in dock work, because the statistics are compiled using broader categories. The SAK considers that this means that it is difficult to achieve a clear view of the trend in accident occurrences. The Committee notes from the Government's report under point V of the report form, that no statistics on occupational accidents and diseases sustained by dockworkers in particular are available because of the statistical categories applied, while acknowledging that dock work was known to be one of the most dangerous occupations.

The Committee recalls that Article 39 of the Convention calls for measures to be taken to ensure that occupational accidents and diseases are reported to the competent authority and, where necessary, investigated in order to assist in their prevention. It also recalls that the report form, under point V, calls for the supply of information on the number of occupational accidents and diseases reported, in so far as this information has not already been supplied in connection with other questions in the form. Given the highly dangerous nature of dock work, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would keep it informed on the measures taken or envisaged to collect and report statistics on occupational accidents and diseases more specifically for dock work, thus facilitating their prevention.