Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162) - Croatia (Ratification: 1991)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2008, Publication: 97th ILC session (2008)

A Government representative, recalling that this was the third occasion on which the application of Convention No. 162 by Croatia had been discussed by the Conference Committee, said that many measures had been taken by the Government to achieve full and effective application of the Convention, as well as to conform to European Union standards, including the adoption of several legislative texts.

The Act on mandatory health monitoring of workers occupationally exposed to asbestos, which had entered into force on 7 August 2007, defined who was considered to be a worker exposed to asbestos and regulated the methods for monitoring the health of such workers, the procedure for diagnosing occupational diseases caused by asbestos, the bodies responsible for health monitoring, and the bodies responsible for conducting diagnostic procedures in the event of suspicion of an occupational disease caused by asbestos. The Act provided that the health of workers occupationally exposed to asbestos and of those who had been recognized as suffering from an occupational disease caused by asbestos was to be monitored, and that diagnostic procedures for suspected occupational diseases were to be undertaken by occupational medical specialists. Health monitoring entailed mandatory preventive examinations at least every three years for a period of 40 years following the termination of the worker's occupational exposure to asbestos, irrespective of whether an occupational disease had already been diagnosed.

Under the Act, not only workers currently at risk of occupational asbestos exposure, but also retired workers and unemployed persons previously employed in workplaces where occupational exposure was possible, were considered to be workers exposed to asbestos. All three categories were included in the health monitoring programme. The Croatian Institute for Occupational Health and Safety Insurance (CIOHSI) was responsible for the procedures for diagnosing and recognizing occupational diseases caused by asbestos and for running the occupational safety and health insurance scheme, which included measures to prevent and detect occupational diseases, as well as rights in the event of diagnosis. A register of workers reported to be suffering from occupational diseases caused by asbestos was maintained by the Croatian Institute for Occupational Medicine (CIOM). The Register of Occupational Diseases defined precisely all diseases caused by asbestos, using codes from the European Schedule of occupational diseases and diagnostic criteria from the 10th International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems in Occupational Health. The Register had been kept since 2000 and was continually updated.

With a view to regulating the entitlement to financial compensation of workers diagnosed with, and recognized as suffering from, an occupational disease caused by asbestos, the Act on compensating workers occupationally exposed to asbestos had also entered into force on 7 August 2007. It covered the procedure for granting claims, the procedure and competent body for settling claims, and the provision of funds for making compensation payments to workers suffering from occupational diseases caused by asbestos. Pursuant to this Act, on 23 August 2007, the Government had established a commission to settle compensation claims. The commission was composed of representatives of the ministries responsible for the economy, health, finances and justice; a representative of the CIOM; a representative of the CIOHSI; a representative of associations representing workers suffering from occupational diseases caused by asbestos; and two trade union representatives. Administrative and technical support was provided by the CIOHSI. By the end of May 2008, the commission had received 710 claims for compensation, while 221 cases had been medically recognized by 1 January 2008 and compensation totalling more than 1 million kuna had been paid to nine claimants by June 2008. Many cases had been delayed due to lack of information. The representatives of associations of workers affected by asbestosis and of the CIOM had been consulted in the preparation of both the above Acts, for which two joint meetings had been organized.

A third Act, on the requirements for workers occupationally exposed to asbestos to an old-age pension had entered into force on 7 August 2007, granting such workers more favourable conditions in the pension scheme based on solidarity between the generations. Occupational exposure to asbestos was deemed to be any direct or indirect exposure to asbestos arising from work performed for an employer, whether it was a natural or legal person, with its seat in the Republic of Croatia and using asbestos in their production. By the end of May 2008, 32 claims had been submitted and resolved. Of the 103 people at the Salonit-Vranjic factory, 81 were eligible for a pension under the Act but had not yet submitted claims.

In the area of environmental protection, a waste management plan for 2007-15 had been prepared, and an Act on the transport of hazardous substances and an ordinance on methods and procedures for the management of waste containing asbestos had entered into force. An ordinance on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos had also been adopted.

On 26 September 2007, the disposal and remediation of asbestos cement waste from the Salonit-Vranjic factory had been completed. The work had been carried out in accordance with professional rules and regulations on handling asbestos waste and the regulations and instructions of the competent ministry. On several occasions, work had been performed at night to avoid working in high daytime temperatures. Transportation had been carried out in accordance with the regulations governing the transport of hazardous substances. The asbestos products remaining in the factory area did not represent hazardous waste as the asbestos was bonded in asbestos cement products. Further procedures to deal with those products were included in the remediation programme for clearing the factory area and would be carried out as prescribed by the law. An agreement had recently been signed with the Croatian Institute for Environmental Protection regarding the second phase of the project.

The Government had been extremely active in developing an integral solution to asbestos-related problems across the country. All necessary legislative and institutional measures had been taken, and the Acts adopted provided a complete legal basis for the exercise of the rights of workers occupationally exposed to asbestos. The legislative measures had been prepared in consultation with trade unions and employers through the Economic and Social Council, and the activities reflected the Government's care for every worker affected. All the responsible institutions had been mobilized to give effect to the commitments made to the ILO high-level direct contacts mission, and the Croatian Government was determined to fulfil its obligations under the legislation adopted. To that end, resources had been allocated in the national budget. In conclusion, the Government representative expressed appreciation for the ILO's support and constructive proposals.

The Employer members thanked the Government representative for the detailed information provided, some of which was new. They recalled that Convention No. 162 was a very comprehensive and technical instrument, the main purpose of which was to ensure the safety and health of persons working or who had worked in the production of asbestos products. The Government representative had provided information on various measures adopted prior to the publication of the report of the Committee of Experts. It would have been useful if that information had been available before the present discussion. They recalled that the case had been discussed by the Conference Committee regularly since 2003. Following the last discussion in 2006, the Government had accepted the proposal to invite a high-level direct contacts mission, which had found a great readiness to cooperate. Progress had been achieved, and the direct contacts mission had reported that the sites producing the asbestos products had all been closed or gone bankrupt.

The Employer members recalled that, in particular, two problems remained relating to the application of Articles Nos 19 and 21 of the Convention, namely the removal of asbestos waste without risk to the health of the workers concerned or to the population living in the vicinity of the factory; and the provision of guarantees concerning the income of workers who were no longer able to work because of the health effects of exposure to asbestos, including, of course, workers who were already ill as a result of their exposure to the substance.

The report of the direct contacts mission indicated that several important initial steps had been taken. Several new laws had been drafted, almost all of which had now come into force, covering in particular the compensation of the workers concerned, including the payment of pensions, as well as the regulation of the handling of asbestos waste. The Committee of Experts had noted that the financing of compensation and pensions for workers who had been exposed to asbestos and were suffering from ill health did not yet appear to be ensured. The statement by the Government representative was therefore to be welcomed that both unemployed and retired persons suffering from occupational exposure to asbestos had been included in the occupational diseases scheme. Although the Act, adopted in 2007 for this purpose, appeared to be appropriate, the Employer members called on the Government to provide detailed information on this matter, including data on the compensation already paid, for examination by the Committee of Experts.

The direct contacts mission had also noted that there was still a lack of reliable statistics on the number of workers suffering from asbestos-related diseases. Particularly in view of the fact that many of the workers concerned had been employed in the factories for over 25 years and were now above 50 years of age, it was urgent to give effect to the conclusions of the direct contacts mission. The Employer members therefore urged the Government to give effect to the measures adopted in the very near future and to keep the Office informed of the progress that was being made. They also called on the Office to continue providing support so that the collaboration which had proved to be so effective could be pursued.

The Worker members recalled that the failure to give effect to Convention No. 162 in Croatia had been discussed in 2003 and in 2006. At the Conference in 2006, the Conference Committee had expressed deep concern at the problem, and especially at the situation at the Salonit-Vranjic factory site. In view of the time that had been wasted, and the gravity of the situation, the Committee had proposed a high-level direct contacts mission with a view to verifying the situation in situ and to assess the progress made. Furthermore, it had invited the Government to start consultations with the social partners on the subject and to submit a full report to the Committee of Experts.

Although it was a so-called technical Convention, the failure to give effect to Convention No. 162 had very serious consequences for the workers concerned, their families, as well as the families who lived near such factories. Asbestos was an extremely dangerous product and its harmful effects had been studied and described by various organizations, including the World Health Organization (WHO). The persons affected choked slowly over the years, eventually suffering a horrible, slow and painful death.

The Worker members recalled that the Government of Croatia had accepted the high-level direct contacts mission and welcomed the Government's full cooperation and its close collaboration with the social partners. The mission had been informed of the various administrative and legislative measures that were under preparation, the impressive list of which was contained in the report of the Committee of Experts. Nevertheless, it had expressed the hope that tangible progress would be achieved, especially in settling the financial claims of the workers at the Salonit-Vranjic factory. On several occasions, the mission had called for measures to be taken on an urgent basis and had recommended the acceleration of administrative and legislative procedures, including judicial procedures. Another important element was the wish expressed by the mission that the policy against asbestos should be based on an overall health and safety prevention plan, in accordance with the Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187).

The Worker members regretted that the Committee of Experts had had to conclude that it was not able to verify whether all the promises had been followed up by concrete measures or whether its previous recommendations had been given effect, and that the Committee of Experts had had to request the Government, in a footnote, to supply full particulars to the Conference. They, however, admitted that, both on the basis of the replies provided by the Government and in the experience of national trade unions, significant progress had been made. They also recognized that political leaders were willing to give priority to the issue, but the fragmented approach adopted so far was not desirable. Workers needed to be full partners in an integrated national action plan.

The integrated approach needed to offer solutions for workers who continued to work and who were not entitled to a pension; needed to ensure the regular medical supervision and the training and relocation of workers; needed to provide for compensation for workers suffering from asbestos-related diseases; and should be based on a system for the surveillance of all workers and citizens exposed to asbestos. Such an integrated approach was necessary, not only due to the ratification of Convention No. 162, but also in view of Croatia's membership in the European Union, which required the adaptation of national law and practice to the acquis communautaire, and particularly the European Directives on the protection of workers against the hazards resulting from exposure to asbestos. It was therefore urgent to take the necessary prevention measures at the Salonit-Vranjic site. Great ecological damage had already been caused by the asbestos waste, stored at the factory site. It was also urgent to remove all asbestos from the site and ensure its remediation so as to avoid any further victims. Moreover, the Worker members regretted that the mission's report and its recommendations were overly focused on this specific site. In their view, it was essential to take into account all exposed sectors and sites.

Although other countries were confronted with similar problems, the magnitude of the problem in Croatia could not be denied. While it was regrettable that years had been wasted on the problem, the Worker members welcomed the fact that, as a result of the constant pressure exercised by the trade unions and the support of the Committee of Experts and the mission, progress was being made, and challenges, although still numerous, were now being given priority.

The Worker member of Croatia recognized that the initial steps taken and the progress achieved demonstrated the Government's willingness to give priority to this urgent matter. However, she emphasized that, contrary to the proposals made by the trade unions and the direct contacts mission, the legislative measures that had been adopted did not constitute a holistic solution to the situation. Several legislative measures had been adopted, instead of a single integrated legal framework, which meant that both the implementation and the situation of the workers concerned would be more complex. She called upon the Government to ensure tripartism and transparency and to give urgent effect to these measures in practice. It also needed to develop solutions for workers who continued to work and were not entitled to pensions; ensure adequate medical examinations within the prescribed time periods; guarantee retraining and relocation in appropriate jobs; and provide compensation for those suffering from asbestos-related diseases. In other words, it needed to adopt an integrated strategy to ensure decent living standards for the workers affected as part of the national action plan for the sectors concerned.

She added that national trade unions found it extremely disturbing that the package of legislative measures adopted did not include provisions on the most important matter, namely the procedure for the management of waste containing asbestos. It was a matter of great concern that 1,700 tonnes of asbestos waste remained in the vicinity of the factory, posing a threat to the workers and the community. The contract for the consolidation programme covering the Salonit-Vranjic factory had been awarded to a company that had not complied with the relevant requirements. The disposal of the waste had been carried out in an irregular manner under very strange circumstances. The operations had been undertaken in the middle of the night by a company with inadequate equipment and no firm proof of a valid licence for working with asbestos. This was in clear violation of the provision in the Convention, which called for the management of waste containing asbestos to be carried out by companies that were duly qualified for that activity.

The violation of Convention No. 162 was a fundamental matter for the workers concerned, their families and the environment, and also amounted to a violation of the right to health for all as set out in the national Constitution. In this matter of life or death, too much time had been wasted, and there was no room for further delay. Rights delayed were rights denied and, in the present case, "rights" literally meant "human lives". She ex- pressed great appreciation for the assistance provided by the ILO and firmly believed that the Government would fulfil its duty to all Croatians by giving full effect to Con- vention No. 162.

The Government representative of Croatia thanked those who had intervened in the discussion and said that she had taken careful note of their comments. She observed that several legislative measures had been adopted, which represented a holistic approach to the issue and were based on the adoption of a unique and integrated legal solution. Information on the measures taken had been posted on the web site of the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare so that all interested parties could have access to the necessary indications. The measures that had been prepared and were now being implemented covered the situation of all persons suffering from asbestos-related diseases, not just those that were work-related. A register of occupational diseases had been kept since 2000, and data was being compiled on the numbers of persons affected by asbestos-related diseases. The social partners had been involved in the formulation of all legal and other measures and programmes adopted through roundtable meetings and other forms of consultation. In conclusion, she re-emphasized the commitment of her Government to take the necessary action to meet its obligations in this matter.

The Employer members thanked the Government for the additional information provided and agreed with the Worker members that there were significant indications of progress in the case. The work of the Office and the missions undertaken had undoubtedly provided the impetus for an improvement in the situation. However, in view of the health situation of the workers concerned, they emphasized the need for rapid action. The situation of these workers was urgent and there was no room for any further delay, especially in terms of measures to provide them with compensation and guarantee their income. The Government representative should provide full information on the implementation in practice of the new laws and other measures adopted. Finally, they called upon the Government to ensure that it complied with all of its obligations in relation to the handling of asbestos and waste containing asbestos with the technical assistance of the Office.

The Worker members again deplored the conclusion of the Committee of Experts that it had been unable to verify whether specific action had been taken by the Government and whether the previous recommendations had been followed. However, on the basis of the Government's reply and the analyses undertaken by the national unions, they noted that considerable progress had been achieved, as indeed might be expected of a State seeking accession to the European Union. Nevertheless, they called on the Government to take all necessary steps, as a matter of urgency, to bring its law and practice into conformity with Convention No. 162, and in particular with the detailed recommendations and conclusions of the direct contacts mission and the observations of the Committee of Experts. In this regard, the Worker members highlighted three major challenges: the underpinning of specific measures through an integrated approach and a proactive national occupational safety and health policy, including measures to combat asbestos in all sectors; the establishment of a monitoring procedure; and, above all, measures to remove asbestos from polluted sites and to treat the waste.

Conclusions

The Committee noted the detailed oral information provided by the Government representative, as well as the discussion that followed.

The Committee recalled the previous discussions and conclusions adopted in the Committee in 2003 and 2006, the comments of the Committee of Experts in 2002-05, the outcome of the High-level Direct Contacts Mission (the Mission) to Croatia in April 2007, and the further comments of the Committee of Experts in 2007.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government regarding the legislative, institutional, judicial, health and environmental protection measures taken by it to follow up on the conclusions of the Mission and to improve the application of the Convention in the country, including the efforts made to rehabilitate the Salonit Factory and to dispose of the asbestos waste at the factory site and the Mravinacka Kava dump site. The Committee noted, in particular, the information on the adoption of legislative measures on diagnostic procedures, health care, settlement of claims for compensation and qualifying conditions for the acquisition of old-age pension by workers occupationally exposed to asbestos. The Committee also noted the information concerning the strengthening of the National Council for Occupational Safety and Health and the central function it had been attributed, including in the overall review of the occupational safety and health system and the national policy development.

The Committee welcomed this information and, in particular, the concrete signs of progress made through the adoption of legislative texts, and action taken to alleviate the financial situation for at least some of the workers already suffering from asbestos-related diseases. However, it regretted that this information had not been submitted to the Committee of Experts in time for it to evaluate the progress made by the Government. The Committee wished to underscore the seriousness of this case and the utmost importance that it attached to concrete and swift action by the Government to implement fully the Convention. The Committee urged the Government to continue, with alacrity, to review claims of workers occupationally exposed to asbestos, to ensure that judicial decisions would be handed down in a timely manner and that compensation and old-age pensions due be paid without further delay. The Committee also urged the Government to take concrete measures to enable workers rendered redundant and still able to work to be retrained and redeployed in other employment.

As regards the measures taken by the Government for rehabilitation of the Salonit factory site in a manner which did not pose a health risk to the workers concerned, including those handling the asbestos and in accordance with relevant national and European environmental standards, the Committee expected that this would be pursued without delay using the appropriate expertise.

The Committee noted with some concern that the approach taken to the general application of the Convention in the country remained fragmented. The Committee considered that a single consolidated legislative framework and a national comprehensive preventative plan of action in the area of occupational safety and health should be pursued. Such a national plan should be adopted in consultation with the representative organizations of employers and workers and should include provisions for concerted action in relation to asbestos including a detailed system for the monitoring of all workers and persons that had been exposed to asbestos. It should also include an awareness-raising campaign targeting workers in sectors where asbestos products might be encountered, in particular in the construction, ship repair, ship-scrapping and port sectors.

The Committee urged the Government to take all further action as required in order to ensure a complete and timely follow-up to the conclusions of the Mission, the Committee of Experts and this Committee to ensure full application of the Convention in the country. The Committee requested the Government to provide full and comprehensive information in a report to be submitted for examination at the forthcoming session of the Committee of Experts, including all relevant legislative provisions, if possible in one of the working languages of the ILO.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2006, Publication: 95th ILC session (2006)

The Government communicated the following written information.

The Republic of Croatia has opted for an integrated solution of the asbestos problem in Croatia by the end of 2006. For this purpose, in January 2006, a coordination body was set up among the three ministries competent to deal with this problem: the Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship; the Ministry of Health and Welfare; and the Ministry of Environmental Protection, Physical Planning and Construction.

With reference to point 3 of the observation: the coordination body of the three ministries competent for asbestos-related issues in the Republic of Croatia that met in January 2006 adopted the following conclusions. First, the Ministry of Health and Welfare (in collaboration with the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship) will draw up a Draft Bill on Meeting the Claims of Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos. Second, the Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship (in collaboration with the Ministry of Health and Welfare and the Croatian Health Insurance Institute) will draw up a Draft Bill on Amendments to the List of Occupational Diseases Law. Third, the Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship will send the Draft Bill on special conditions for acquiring entitlements from retirement insurance for workers occupationally exposed to asbestos to the legislature. The Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship will propose appropriate measures to encourage the introduction of new technologies for asbestos-free production after receiving and assessing the investment project of the transition to asbestos-free production. Fourth, the Ministry of Environmental Protection, Physical Planning and Construction will draw up a recovery programme for repairing the environmental damage to the factory compound of Salonit d.d. and the Mravinacka kava dump site, and the source of financing involved. The timescale of the end of 2006 was envisaged for the implementation of the said conclusions, by which time all the tasks are supposed to be completely executed. Some of the tasks stated have already been carried out, and some of the agreed on draft laws have been referred to the legislature. The Government has given a detailed description of these draft laws.

In the Ministry of Health and Welfare in 2003 activities started with respect to issues of the diagnosis, treatment and compensation claims of people suffering from ill health caused by asbestos. At that time, a procedure was started for the laying down of distinctive criteria for the establishment of occupational diseases caused by asbestos (asbestosis of the pulmonary parenchyma), dynamics of preventive medical examinations for all employed persons who have been occupationally exposed to asbestos (people who were employed earlier, who have retired et al.) along with an estimate of the resources necessary for such purposes. Since the existing legal regulations did not, in a satisfactory manner, handle the problems of persons suffering from exposure to asbestos, in March 2006 two expert commissions were set up in the Ministry of Health and Welfare for the handling of these issues: first, an Expert Commission for the drafting of an Injury at Work and Occupational Ill Health Insurance Law, and draft Regulations concerning Preventive Diagnosis, Treatment and Surveillance of Persons Suffering from Asbestosis; and secondly, an Expert Commission for the drafting of a Meeting regarding the Claims of Employees Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos Law.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Toxins Law (Official Gazette, Nos. 27/99, 37/99 and 55/99), the Ministry of Health and Welfare has adopted a list of toxic substances the production, marketing and use of which are prohibited (Official Gazette, Nos. 29/05 and 34/05), according to which, from 1 January 2006, a ban on the production, marketing and use of prescribed asbestos fibres has been in force. However, in line with article 53 of the Chemicals Law (Official Gazette, No. 150/05) the Ministry of Health and Welfare, with the consent of the Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship on 14 February 2006 adopted a List of Hazardous Chemicals, the Marketing of which is Banned or Restricted.

In line with this List of Hazardous Chemicals with reference to the kinds of asbestos fibre known as crocidolite, amosite, anthrophyllite, actinolite and tremolite, these fibres are not allowed to be marketed or used, and neither are any products that contain any of these fibres. With respect to chrysotile, there is a total ban on the sale or the use of it or of products containing chrysotile, but concomitantly with certain exceptions. From the ban, then, exceptions are made for membranes for existing electrolysis apparatus while it can be used or while it can be serviced, or until an appropriate material without any asbestos fibre contents can be found. The use of products that contain asbestos fibres quoted on the List of Hazardous Chemicals that were incorporated into products before the List of Toxic Substances came into force can be continued until they become waste or until their service life has elapsed. Independently of the regulations that regulate the classification, packaging or labelling of hazardous substances and products, they must, when being marketed or used, be additionally furnished with asbestos signs according to the regulations concerning the labelling of hazardous chemicals.

With reference to points 2, 7, 8 of the observation: labour inspectors regularly carry out inspections in the Salonit d.d Vranjic plant, which produces construction materials, one of the additives during manufacturing being asbestos. The last inspection was carried out during 15-17 May 2006 and the State Inspectorate reported that in Salonit d.d Vranjic this manufacturing line had been halted because it was impossible to market the product, and only two employees were found carrying out works with special conditions of work - working and finishing asbestos-cement pipes. From an inspection of the hazard assessment for the jobs that are undertaken in Salonit d.d in bankruptcy it was found out that jobs with special conditions of work are carried out in a total of 45 positions on which 143 employees are working (out of the current labour force of 179). Of these 143 employees, 84 carry out jobs with special conditions of work described by the Government.

With respect to point 4 of the observation: in the inspectorial control carried out in March 2006 it was determined that the employer regularly carried out inspections of the working environment in line with provisions of the article of the Protection at Work Law (Official Gazette, Nos. 59/96, 94/96, 114/03 and 100/04) and the provisions of the regulations concerning the testing of the working environment, machines and plant with increased hazards (Official Gazette, Nos. 114/02 and 126/03). The tests are carried out by an authorized firm that possesses a current authorization of the minister competent for labour matters. In the last test of the working environment that was carried out in July 2004 by the authorized firm ZAST d.o.o of Split, it was determined that all the parameters of the working environment were within permitted values including the concentration of asbestos fibres in the air, and appropriate certificates thereto were issued. A list of measured concentration of asbestos dust at all production locations is included.

With reference to points 5 and 9: a labour inspector with responsibility for protection at work determined at the employer that the workers are provided with personal protective equipment laid down by the hazard assessment, that they have two lockers, one for working and one for ordinary clothing, they have shower cabinets and wash basins and that the workers are forbidden to go out of the factory compound in their working clothes or to come in their working clothes to work. The provisions of the Regulations concerning protection at work in the processing of non-metal raw materials (Official Gazette No. 10/986) and the Regulations concerning personal protective equipment at work and personal protective equipment (Official Gazette No. 35/69) state that an employer has to provide clothing lockers for working and for ordinary clothing, shower cabinets, the laundry of the working clothing, and the kind of personal protective equipment according to the dangers in the place of work. The penal provisions of the Protection at Work Law allow for fines to be imposed on legal entities or corporations in a range from 10,000 to 90,000 kuna, and for a responsible person in a legal entity in a range from 3,000 to 10,000 kuna. A labour inspector with responsibility for protection at work can also on the spot fine workers 100 kuna and his or her immediate supervisor 500 kuna in cases when a worker is not wearing the regulation personal protective equipment, when the worker is smoking in premises where smoking is not allowed, and other cases.

With reference to point 6: after the first unsuccessful experience, the Ministry once again announced a public tender for the drawing up of a rehabilitation programme for Mravinacka kava and the Salonit d.d. Vranjic factory compound, and this was published in the Official Gazette of 09/06, 27 February, 2006. The deadline defined for the drawing up of the rehabilitation programme is 20 September, 2006. The Ministry will propose a solution for the funding of the rehabilitation programme. In the meantime, via environmental inspection procedures, the Ministry several times carried out inspections of the Salonit d.d. factory. In the performance of the inspectorial supervision, the measure of covering up the asbestos-cement sludge temporarily deposited in the factory compound was ordered, as measure for temporary rehabilitation. Environmental protection inspectors from the Ministry of Environmental Protection, Physical, Planning and Construction have carried out regular controls of Salonit d.d. factory since 2000. The asbestos waste from the manufacturing process in the Salonit d.d. factory that was previously deposited in an abandoned cave/mine where raw materials for Dalmacijacement had been extracted has not been deposited there, as a result of a ban on the part of the inspectors, since 1 July, 2003. The waste sludge that was created during the process of the production of asbestos building materials and structures, pursuant to orders of the inspectors, was moved from the open-air part of the factory compound into a closed factory shed where it is still waiting final disposition. Asbestos fibres that are in the sludge are stabilized (in solid state) and there are no emissions of particles from the waste sludge in the atmosphere. The rest of the waste (rejects) from the constructional material that contains asbestos, which is also inert and in a solid state, is stored in the factory compound belonging to Salonit d.d. The same Rehabilitation Programme will define the manners and procedures for looking after the remaining asbestos-containing waste from the factory compound of the firm Salonit d.d. Vrajnic.

With reference to point 10: Salonit d.d. Vranjic submitted on 21 March 2005 an application for the import of 2,500 tons of asbestos, the representatives of the firm stating that they were aware that asbestos was on the List of Forbidden Substances, the ban on the use of which came into force on 1 January, 2005, and hence the ban on their product line, but they stated that the sought quantity would be sufficient and it would be used up in the production of asbestos cement products. As we reported above, in line with the most recent inspection carried out at the employer, performed between 15 and 17 May 2006 by the State Inspectorate in the company Salonit d.d. Vranjic, production had been halted because of the impossibility of selling the product on the market. In addition, before the Committee, a Government representative indicated that during the most recent labour inspection a number of photos had been taken, which were available on CD-ROM. His Government was aware that insufficient information and explanations had been provided in earlier reports and that much could have been done earlier. Nevertheless, quite a lot had been done in relation to the problem of asbestos since 1990, including the adoption of new regulations and their implementation. The occupational safety and health legislation in his country was in harmony with Convention No. 155 and the European Union Framework Directive and took into account technical progress and scientific knowledge. He recalled that when the Ordinance on occupational exposure levels had entered into force in 1993, the permitted occupational exposure level to asbestos had been drastically reduced from 175 particles per cubic metre to a mere two particles per cubic metre. His Government was aware that its first priority in the field of occupational safety and health had to be action in relation to asbestos and he believed that his country had started to resolve the problem in an adequate and effective manner. His Government was also fully aware that resolving the problem would require long-term action, not only in relation to the workers in Salonit who were exposed to asbestos, but also bearing in mind future problems related to the demolition of buildings and the replacement of materials containing asbestos. He expressed his willingness to provide any further information that might be needed and to cooperate with all bodies and institutions that could help in resolving the very serious problem of asbestos.

Commenting on the information provided in document D.11, the speaker said that the relevant authorities had engaged in consultations with experts from other countries and Croatia had tried to follow the same approach as that adopted in neighbouring countries. While the occupational safety and health legislation in Croatia provided a good basis for technical action to address the problem of asbestos, he acknowledged that in certain aspects it was not completely in harmony with the Convention. Nevertheless, it was not true to say that there were no regulations respecting asbestos in the country. He added that since 1990 much had been done to improve working conditions, including those relating to asbestos. For example, it was no longer permitted to empty bags under pressure and asbestos dust was not permitted in the environment. Appropriate filters and ventilation systems had to be installed. There was rigorous health surveillance and specific regulations concerning work involving asbestos, including a prohibition on such work being carried out by persons under 18 years of age and those suffering from certain medical diseases. Provision had also been made for early retirement for workers suffering from certain health problems. He added that the help of ILO experts would be welcome in endeavouring to overcome this very serious problem.

The Employer members thanked the Government for the information provided and stated that Convention No. 162 was a very comprehensive technical convention that dealt with an issue which was particularly important for occupational safety and health. The case had already been discussed in 2003 in the Conference Committee. As of 1998, the Salonit factory mentioned in the observation of the Committee of Experts had changed from a public to a private enterprise and represented only 2 to 3 per cent of national industry. Its name should not therefore be mentioned in the observation. In the discussion in 2003, the Government had stated that it was aware of the seriousness of the situation and its responsibility in the matter, and undertook to take a series of steps, including bringing the national legislation into conformity with the Convention through: the adoption of new legislation respecting the treatment of waste and the prohibition of the production and commercialization of products containing asbestos; the provision of adequate incentives for the replacement of asbestos with other products; and the provision of funds for the restructuring of production in the sectors concerned. The reports in 2004, 2005 and 2006 had contained no information on any laws or regulations to give effect to the Convention. Little information had been provided on the allegations made by the workers exposed to asbestos. There was no information on the inspections carried out or on the shortcomings regarding personal protective equipment or special protective clothing for such workers. Nor was there any information on possible exposure to airborne asbestos during waste disposal processes, or on measures to provide education and written information to workers on the health risks of asbestos exposure. Furthermore, it was not known whether the Bill mentioned by the Government had undergone a due process of consultation with the most representative employers' and workers' organizations.

They noted that, although the Government representative had provided additional information in his statement, he had not provided any updated information on the situation with regard to the Bill. Although he had provided further details on the inspections carried out and the protective equipment and clothing, the information concerning the treatment of waste and available treatment methods was insufficient. Before formulating their conclusions, the Employer members wished to know whether the Government was in a position to provide more information on the following points: the current situation of the future Act respecting the production and commercialization of products containing asbestos; the extent of the consultations carried out on the Bill; the adequacy of the inspection methods to measure the presence of asbestos; and the measures envisaged to treat waste containing asbestos in the above enterprise.

The Worker members thanked the Government representative for the oral and written information provided and recalled that the Conference Committee had discussed the case in 2003. They emphasized that asbestos was an extremely dangerous product. Several health organizations, including the WHO, had studied and described its harmful effects. Persons affected by asbestos experienced several types of symptoms and died gradually of suffocation. It was a horrible, slow and painful death. Exposure to asbestos also caused other diseases, including lung cancer. At the 2003 Conference, the Government had requested ILO technical assistance to help solve the problems in the implementation and application of the Convention. Between 2003 and 2006, the Office had offered its technical assistance on three occasions, but the Government had never accepted these offers. Moreover, at the request of the Croatian trade unions, an ILO specialist in occupational safety and health had carried out a study on the situation in the country and made a number of recommendations. In its latest observation, the Committee of Experts mentioned several problems which persisted in the country. With regard to the measures taken to prevent and monitor health risks due to occupational exposure to asbestos and to protect workers against such risks, it had noted that the situation in the Salonit factory had not improved, but indeed had deteriorated. It had also expressed deep concern at the fact that the conditions in the Salonit factory were not only putting the lives of workers at risk, but also those of the population living nearby. The Committee of Experts had noted that labour inspections were not effective and that inspectors did not have the appropriate technical equipment to measure asbestos levels in the workplace. Furthermore, the Government had not provided any detailed information on the manner in which inspections were carried out, their frequency, quality and the equipment used by the inspectors to measure asbestos levels in the Salonit factory.

With regard to the disposal of waste containing asbestos, the Committee of Experts had noted that, despite the decision in July 2004 by inspectors requiring the employer to temporarily cover stored asbestos with a waterproof tarpaulin, and contrary to the information provided by the Government, waste containing asbestos was still stored in the open air on the Salonit factory premises. Finally, the Committee of Experts had noted that the competent authorities had not made sufficient efforts to identify all persons, including current workers, former workers and people living in the neighbourhood of the factory, who might have come into contact with asbestos and risked contracting an asbestos-related disease. The oral and written information provided by the Government representative described a certain degree of progress; progress, however, which could not be verified by our Committee and with regard to which the Worker members, based on information from the Croatian trade unions, had serious doubts. The Government had neglected social dialogue regarding this matter. Indeed, the social partners had not been consulted regarding the measures described by the Government. Moreover, according to the Government, asbestos production had been halted because it was impossible to sell it on the market. This raised a question: would asbestos be produced again if demand increased? Would it not be more responsible and reasonable to halt production due to the obvious health risks for workers and the neighbourhood, and the violation of Convention No. 162? It was a very serious problem which required an immediate solution. The Worker members indicated that close dialogue with the social partners had to be established and that legislative measures needed to be taken to counter the harmful effects of asbestos, not only for the workers still employed in the factory, but for the future, as the harmful effects of asbestos exposure only emerged after several years.

The Worker member of Croatia stated that the Articles of the Convention were currently being breached, even though its observance was obligatory because it had been incorporated into the Croatian legal system. Nevertheless, the necessary laws and regulations had not yet been adopted, as noted in paragraph 3 of the observation of the Committee of Experts. He emphasized that the trade unions in Croatia had been advocating an absolute ban on the use of asbestos as a raw material and the development of an overall solution for the victims, including: severance payments for workers still working at Salonit-Vranjic, the only factory that was still using asbestos; the payment of compensation to workers who suffered from asbestos-related diseases, or to their families if the worker had deceased; medical examinations for all those confirmed to have been exposed to asbestos every three years for the next 40 years; more favourable retirement entitlements for those who had been exposed to asbestos; and compensation for damages for inhabitants suffering from asbestos-related diseases. Furthermore, there needed to be an overall consolidation and disposal of asbestos waste dumps including management for all other cases of contact with asbestos in the future.

Salonit-Vranjic was the only factory in Croatia still using asbestos and the terrible estimate was that there were 1,700 tonnes of asbestos waste in its premises and workers there were being poisoned everyday. Moreover, the factory only accounted for 10 per cent of the entire asbestos problem in Croatia, and there was also asbestos in other factories, shipyards and construction companies that had used asbestos. There was no systematic register of diseased persons, so it could only be estimated that, in Croatia, there were approximately 45,000 people who had been temporarily or permanently exposed to asbestos since 1960. As of 1990, some 450 workers had been reported as suffering from asbestos-related diseases, of whom around 200 had died. At least an additional 1,000 to 1,500 of today's workers were estimated to be suffering from diseases caused by asbestos. The emergence of symptoms could be deferred for up to ten years following exposure, making the responsibility of the State as the previous owner of Salonit-Vranjic greater than it seemed. He affirmed that several provisions of the Convention and, particularly, Articles 12, 14, 18, 19, 21 and 22 were being violated. The national legislation did not contain laws and regulations to apply the Convention. There was a draft law to ban the production and sale of asbestos products and provide for means for the restructuring of asbestos production into asbestos-free production, but this draft legislation had never come into force. The list of toxic substances, the production, marketing and use of which were prohibited, effective as from 1 January 2006, included asbestos in its first version, but the reference to asbestos had been removed from the revised version. The Government had promised to make the majority of the relevant draft legislation available for public debate by 1 June 2006. It had also promised that Salonit-Vranjic would be closed by the end of June 2006, but the coordinating body established for that purpose did not include the social partners. He expressed the hope that social dialogue and political awareness would finally lead to the commencement of action to resolve the asbestos problem in Croatia.

He recalled that the Government had opened negotiations for accession to the European Union (EU). This process included an analysis of the harmonization of the national legislation with the acquis communautaire, including those relating to occupational safety and health. An impact assessment had shown that action to address the situation of the Salonit plant would cost around 70 million kunas, but this analysis had not taken into account the costs of removing materials that contained asbestos and were built into production facilities, plants, ships, carriages, etc. The Government had stated that the country would not have difficulties in transposing the acquis communautaire in this field. However, the Croatian trade union movement seriously doubted the Government's assessment of the situation and the efforts that were necessary. The case of Croatia had been included in the preliminary list of individual cases which the Government had received in advance. He therefore regretted that the Government had not considered discussing the case nationally with the social partners. He indicated that such disregard of social dialogue was common, but was particularly serious in the case of asbestos. Although Convention No. 162 was not one of the ILO's fundamental Conventions, each Convention became fundamental if it was not implemented because what was at stake was human rights, commitments to international law and the achievements of civilization. The labour inspection for concentration of asbestos fibres in the air relevant to the case had taken place almost two years ago, in July 2004. Production at Salonit had now been halted because there was no demand for its products. It was to be regretted that it was only for economic reasons that production had been halted. He emphasized that workers were still working at the factory at that very moment. Failure to comply with the Convention amounted to a failure to respect human health and dignity.

The Worker member of Austria stated that the facts of the case spoke for themselves. The situation was a matter of great concern. It was vital to urge the Government to take measures that were sufficient to give effect to the recommendations made by the Committee of Experts. The Government had a dual responsibility in this case, firstly to adopt legislation that gave effect to the Convention, and secondly as the former owner of the Salonit factory. Clearly, the case involved a responsibility from the past, which was all the more important because the substances in question were highly dangerous. Those who were exposed included those who worked directly in the production and processing of asbestos and products containing asbestos and those who lived in the vicinity of the respective enterprises. They ran the risk of malignant tumours and serious disease, resulting in a terrible death. While there might be an appropriate legal framework to address the problem, what was of concern was its implementation in practice. Action needed to be taken immediately. The victims had a right to effective protective measures. If nothing was done, more and more people would be affected. It was therefore a matter of great frustration that the Committee had to address the case once again. What was needed was not just protection, but also post-exposure measures in the form of a coherent and consistent health plan to monitor potential victims and provide the necessary care for those who had been contaminated. He drew attention to the conclusions drawn in the context of the process of accession to the EU, where the Government and the European Commission appeared to have concluded that there was no problem of compatibility with the respective European regulations. However, he understood that there was a close correspondence between the requirements of the Convention and the provisions of EU legislation. If Croatia was not complying with the Convention, it could not be in conformity with EU legislation. Experience, including that of his own country, had demonstrated that this was a problem that could only be solved effectively with the full involvement of the social partners and national stakeholders. He therefore called upon the Government to engage in broad dialogue at the national level on the subject of how to deal with the very serious problem of asbestos faced by the country so that action could be taken to prevent any more asbestos-related diseases from occurring and to provide the necessary care and assistance to the victims.

The Government representative thanked the members of the Committee for their comments and reassured the Committee that the Government favoured tripartism to solve the problem and would bring together all the relevant partners as soon as possible. The Parliamentary Committee for Labour, Health and Social Affairs had decided to hold a session in that factory to be able to better appreciate the situation. According to the data provided by the Croatian Institute of Public Health, 297 cases of asbestosis had been found between 1990-2005. As a consequence of mesotomia, 37 persons died in 2000, 30 in 2001, 45 in 2002, 27 in 2003 and 38 in 2004. The draft ordinance on the protection of workers exposed to asbestos would be sent to the ILO in the near future. It was expected that the ordinance would be adopted by the end of 2006. It was regretted that it had not been possible yet to benefit from technical assistance for reasons beyond the Government's control. However, the Government was committed to cooperate with the ILO on these matters.

The Employer members thanked the Government member for the detailed information. However, it was still insufficient to ascertain the degree of compliance in law and in practice with the provisions of Convention No. 162. He expressed concern that, in spite of urgency that dated back three years, measures had not been taken to ensure full compliance with the Convention. The Employer members urged the Government to send detailed information that would permit effective verification that the conditions of workers exposed to serious health risks were in compliance with the provisions of the Convention. They asked that the means be made available to labour inspectors to allow them to measure the amount of asbestos as well as to ensure protective measures for workers, such as clothing and sanitary installations. They called upon the Government to establish effective systems of written information as well as adequate training for all workers in contact with asbestos. They considered that the Office should offer its assistance to the Government to allow it to meet its obligations regarding the Convention and requested that a high-level contacts mission visit the country to follow-up on this case.

The Worker members expressed the hope that the Government would work closely with the Office and the social partners in order to reach a solution and also to take measures as a matter of urgency to address and remedy all aspects of the case at hand. They felt that a lot of time had been wasted and that it was high time that the Government received a high-level direct contacts mission with a view to introducing measures, which would allow for the Convention to be fully implemented. Any further deterioration of the situation would be totally unacceptable.

The representative of the Secretary-General subsequently announced that the Government of Croatia had accepted the visit of a high-level direct contacts mission, as proposed by the Committee.

The Committee noted the oral and written information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee recalled the previous discussion and conclusions adopted in this Committee in 2003, as well as the comments of the Committee of Experts in 2004 and 2005.

The Committee, while regretting the previous limited response to the calls for urgent action in this area, noted the following information provided by the Government: that a ban on the production, marketing and use of certain asbestos fibres, including chrysotile, had been in force since 1 January 2006; that in the context of a labour inspection conducted from 15 to 17 May 2006, it had been determined that production had ceased at the Salonit-Vranjic factory site; and that, as part of an effort to resolve the asbestos problem through an integrated solution, the Government had set up for that purpose an inter-ministerial body coordinating the activities of three relevant ministries. It further noted the information that, at a meeting in January 2006, this inter-ministerial body had decided to prepare draft laws on Meeting the Claims of Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos, amending the List of Occupational Diseases Law, as well as on Special Conditions for Acquiring Entitlements from Retirement Insurance for Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos. It also took note of the information that proposals had been requested concerning appropriate measures to encourage the introduction of new technologies for asbestos-free production and that a recovery programme had been commissioned for repairing the environmental damage caused to the factory compound of the Salonit d.d. and the Mravinacka Kava dump site.

The Committee noted, however, that the Government did not provide any or very limited information regarding the volume of the remaining stocks of asbestos in the country and how to handle them in a safe manner; the extent of possible occupational exposure to asbestos in other workplaces in the country; the actual and required procedures for providing relevant information to workers on work with hazardous products; the current status of future legislation concerning the commercialization of asbestos products; the required and actual frequency of labour inspections, the manner in which labour inspection was carried out and the technical equipment made available to the labour inspectors; the actual and planned handling of asbestos waste; as well as the consultations carried out with the social partners on the measures to be taken including on the draft legislation.

In view of the time that had already elapsed and the serious nature of the situation, the Committee invited the Government to accept, as a matter of urgency, a high-level direct contacts mission with a view to verifying the situation "in situ" and to follow-up on this case. It also requested the Government to enter into effective consultations with the more representative employers' and workers' organizations regarding measures for an effective application of the Convention in both law and practice. The Committee further requested the Government to send a full and comprehensive report, to the next session of the Committee of Experts containing information on measures taken to bring its legislation in line with the Convention, on the situation of workers that might still be exposed to asbestos, and detailed information on all points raised by the Conference Committee and the Committee of Experts. The Committee expressed the firm hope that it would be able to note tangible progress in the near future.

The representative of the Secretary-General subsequently announced that the Government of Croatia had accepted the visit of a high-level direct contacts mission, as proposed by the Committee.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2003, Publication: 91st ILC session (2003)

The Government provided the following information.

In October 2000, the Ministry of Health set up a multidisciplinary working group composed of the representatives of different ministries, institutes and trade unions to deal with the issue of workers who were professionally exposed to asbestos fibres and contracted related occupational diseases. Between August 2001 and January 2002, a number of meetings of this working group took place, referring in particular to problems of diagnosis, treatment and claims for damages of persons with asbestosis-related diseases.

The company, Salonit d.d. Vranjic, the only company in Croatia engaging in asbestos-based production, initiated the resolution of the problem of using asbestos. In October 2001, the company submitted to the Ministry of Economy its development programme presenting the technology for transition from current asbestos-cement production to new non-asbestos technologies. The programme also dealt with environmental activities related to the decontamination of the factory site, disassembly of the plant and rehabilitation of the quarry in Mravinci.

With regard to the technical part of the programme, the Ministry of Economy, in its report of 4 December 2001, found it satisfactory for the moment, considering the fact that the first priority was to deal with the damage claims of persons with asbestosis and to rehabilitate the factory and the site. As regards the protection of health and environment from asbestos waste and emissions, the Ministry for Environmental Protection and Physical Planning, in its letter of 24 September 2001, stated that a review of the existing legislation related to waste management was under way and that it was to be harmonized with EU regulations in addition to the already existing regulations that directly or indirectly regulated particular issues related to asbestos including: the Ordinance on the Requirements in Hazardous Waste Management; Ordinance on Limit Values for the Emission of Pollutants into Air from Stationary Sources; and the Rules on the Estimate of Environmental Impact.

On the basis of the multidisciplinary consideration of the problems related to the production, marketing and exposure to asbestos, the working group adopted, at its meeting of 12 July 2002, proposals for the solution of the problem, which covered in particular the questions of the "Diagnosis and prevention of asbestos-related occupational diseases" and the "Payment of damages in the case of asbestos-related diseases". As to the "Issue of production at Salonit d.d. Vranjic", the working group engaged the Ministry of Economy, the Ministry of Finance, the National Privatization Fund, the Ministry for Environmental Protection and Physical Planning and Salonit d.d. from Vranjic to propose to the Government of Croatia the solution of this problem by means of a separate law modelled on the Slovenian Law on the Prohibition of Production and Marketing of Asbestos Products, and Provision of Funds for Restructuring of Asbestos Production into Non-Asbestos Production and related regulations, particularly because of the fact that the Government of Croatia, having signed the Stabilization and Association Agreement, was obliged to harmonize its legislation with the legislation of the EU, including the EU Directives related to asbestosis.

The Government representative stated that immediately after receiving the observations, the Association of Persons with Asbestosis-Vranjic, the Institute for Safety at Work of the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare had forwarded them to the State Inspectorate of the Government of Croatia which carried out an inspection, compared the current situation with the provisions of the Asbestos Convention, and finally adopted a number of solutions for improving the situation. The Government of Croatia encouraged the diagnosis, treatment and damage claims of the persons with asbestos-related diseases, and proposed solutions with the involvement of all competent bodies of the government administration and the representatives of the board and the trade union of Salonit-Vranjic factory.

The question of the workers who were exposed to asbestos fibres at work and thus contracted occupational diseases was raised in mid-July 1999 through the request of the Association of Persons with Asbestosis, who used to work for the company Salonit d.d. in Vranjic, for retroactive recognition of an extra insurance time. The Committee for Labour, Social Policy and Health of the House of Representatives of the Croatian Parliament charged, on 26 June 2000, the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare, and the Ministry of Health to consider the options and to propose the way of retroactively implementing the provisions of the Law on Extra Insurance Time No. 71/99 for the employees of Salonit and charged other institutions to propose possible solutions for permanently abandoning the manufacture of asbestos products. During this procedure, other important problems related to asbestosis in Croatian workers were noted such as the increased reports of individual medical expert witnesses in lawsuits. This was why the Ministry of Health set up, in October 2000, a multidisciplinary working group composed of the representatives of the ministries, institutes and trade unions, to deal with the same issues. Additionally, the Government of Croatia entrusted the multidisciplinary working group with preparing and submitting to the Government a special study on the problems of diagnosis, treatment and damage claims of persons with asbestos-related diseases, including the analysis and proposed solutions. Upon its completion, the study was forwarded to all members of the working group for their comments. Written proposals and opinions were forwarded by all agencies whose representatives participated in the work of the working group.

In the second half of the year 2001, the labour inspectors of the State Inspectorate undertook inspections for occupational diseases caused by the harmful effects of asbestos (asbestosis) at workplaces that used or were assumed to have used asbestos in their operations. The inspections were undertaken with the manufacturers of asbestos-cement products, at shipyards, shipwrecking plants, and with employers who had used asbestos for braking systems. According to the latest inspection findings the workers were regularly sent for periodic medical check-ups when they performed work under special working conditions, and the employer undertook specific measures to reduce the negative effects of asbestos. He then gave some figures related to the company in question. The resolution of the problem of using asbestos was initiated by Salonit d.d. Vranjic, the only company in Croatia engaging in asbestos-based production. It was necessary that, in addition to Salonit d.d. Vranjic, all relevant institutions and the State should join hands in solving the problem of production in Salonit. According to its own information, Salonit Vranjic - currently employing 265 workers - was for the most part privately owned. In October 2001, the company submitted to the Ministry of the Economy its Development Programme, presenting the technology for transition from current asbestos-cement production to new non-asbestos technologies (PEHD pipes) and the production of undulated plates in non-asbestos fibre cement technology without filter press. The first priority of the Ministry of the Economy was to deal with the damages claims of the persons with asbestosis and to rehabilitate the factory and the site. The costs of the introduction of new non-asbestos technologies should be borne by the owner of the company. Considering the high level of cost of the transition to new technologies (about 11 million Euro according to the estimates of the Company Board) it was believed that because of the specific situation of Salonit, and to maintain employment, the company could, at this stage of reconstructuring, be assisted through adequate incentives (favourable loans for new technologies, guarantees, etc.). Moreover, the Ministry also believed that the problem of environmental pollution resulting from many years of work with asbestos was not only the problem of Salonit. It proposed a possibility for the financing of the decontamination of the factory from the national budget.

The Employer members thanked the representative of the Government of Croatia for his statement. They pointed out that the Committee of Experts had not yet taken into account the reply of the Government. They referred to several issues raised in the Committee's observation. In respect of the increased concentration of asbestos dust in the air that created health hazards for employees and people living in the environment, they requested the Government of Croatia to state the concentration limits allowed by national law. They also referred to the frequently repeated Committee observation that there was a general lack of appropriate information. They stated that the Government representative did not give details on the different issues raised in the Committee's observation. It had only indicated the subsequent measures taken and a few of these actions had been indicated in D.11, including the setting up of a Working Group to examine, in consultation with those concerned, the situation and to come up with possible measures to overcome the problems. They also noted that no concrete explanations had been given concerning compensation and insurances. They further noted that a new act would bring the national legislation into line with the EU standards. They supported the Government's intention to find a solution and urged it to take immediate effective action, especially to stop unprotected work resulting in exposure to asbestos. They asked the Government to indicate whether work in the factory was continuing and, if so, under what conditions.

The Worker members indicated their great interest in the fact that the choice of the cases for discussion reflected the whole range of ILO Conventions, in addition to the so-called fundamental Conventions. While Convention No. 162 belonged to the more technical group of Conventions, it appeared far less technical when examined in substance. One cannot fail to observe that asbestos was an extremely dangerous product, the harmful effects of which had been widely studied. In Belgium, asbestos was associated with what was commonly called "a soft death", an atrocious, slow and very painful death. In this sense, the nature of Convention No. 162 was not at all technical; it was about the life and death of workers.

It was important to discuss the difficulties in the application of this Convention because similar realities existed in a number of countries, and because of the low ratification rate of this Convention. More than ten years after its entering into force, only 26 States had ratified it. It was therefore desirable that the present discussion would encourage other States to ratify Convention No. 162, which the Workers' group had qualified as "fundamental" for workers in relevant sectors.

The Worker members referred to instances of malfunctioning and problems of application noted by the Committee of Experts concerning the fate of the workers and the inhabitants of the area of the Salonit factory. According to the Association of Worker Victims of Asbestos in Vranjic, 200 of them had died. The responsibilities in this case did not only lay with the present private employer but it was more that of the Government of Croatia.

Referring to the exact wording of the provisions of the Convention as well as to the comments of the Committee of Experts, the Worker members stressed the following violations: Article 12 (prohibition of spraying all forms of asbestos); Article 14 (adequate labelling of the product and the provision of information to the workers concerned); Article 18 (protective measures concerning workers' clothing); Article 19 (risk-free elimination of waste containing asbestos and protection of the environment); and Article 22 (promotion of information, dissemination and education). In their opinion, the violation of Article 22 came close to a premeditated criminal act and the Government must react quickly to remedy the situation, following the example of Slovenia which, confronted with similar problems, had succeeded in adopting the necessary measures. The progress referred to by the Government turned out to be insufficient. Every 20 days, a person died from the consequences of the irresponsible way asbestos was being handled. In addition to financial compensation, the Government should adopt mandatory legislative measures that would put an end to this very serious and unacceptable situation. To this end, they suggested that the Government should request technical assistance from the ILO.

The Worker member of the Netherlands noted that this was a terrible case and wished to be quite blunt in his remarks. While he considered the behaviour of the enterprise concerned as irresponsible, it was the Government that was responsible for the implementation of the Convention. Even though the Government talked about its intention to change its legislation to conform to EU legislation, this deplorable practice of exposure to asbestos at the workplace had continued for a few years. He noted the difficulties encountered in eliminating this dangerous situation and urged the Committee of Experts to closely monitor it by more frequent examinations than the five years of the normal reporting cycle, irrespective of the proposed governmental intention to conform to EU standards. Conforming to the much stricter EU standards in law and in practice would take the country many years. He also thought that other provisions of the Convention such as Articles 4, 5, 11, 17 and 21 should probably be invoked in this case. He emphasized the fact that it was not only the protection of workers in the production and use of asbestos-containing products that had to be resolved, but also the work situations involving maintenance, repair and demolition work. He recalled the enormity of present and future exposure of workers in the countries in the region where asbestos had been used extensively in many products and structures and more particularly in buildings and infrastructure that were now being gradually demolished and repaired. He wondered how many other factories in Croatia were making these products and how many other countries were in the same situation as Croatia where in the future many more people would die eventually of asbestos-related cancers which usually were diagnosed some 40 years after exposure.

Another Government representative thanked the members of the Committee who had made comments and assured them that they would be helpful in solving the problems under discussion. He gave a few details and figures in response to some of the questions raised during the discussion. Concerning the concentration levels of asbestos dust at the workplace in question, he cited figures to indicate that the concentration levels of asbestos dust at the workplace in question had significantly diminished. He gave indications of improvements in the conditions of transport, delivery, storage, handling, disposal of asbestos and asbestos-containing products. He stated that appropriate personal protective clothing and equipment was being furnished, washed and stored correctly. Proper washing facilities were also provided. The required information on the dangers and means of protection were provided including the production of relevant brochures and the organization of lectures on the subject. He said his Government was well aware of the seriousness of the situation and of its responsibility in the matter. The fact that it was one of only 26 countries to have ratified this Convention was proof of such awareness. The fact that it had set up a multidisciplinary working group that included the employers and the workers in order to deal with the question was another. He recalled the demanding nature of the task of adjustment to the EU standards, including in this domain of occupational safety and health. He agreed that the example of what had been done in the neighbouring country of Slovenia was what they sought to emulate but it had to be recalled that Slovenia was in a better position in the matter due to its higher level of development. He assured the Committee that his Government would do its utmost, with the collaboration of all, including the workers and employers, to solve this serious problem that was also detrimental to the touristic region where the enterprise was located. He indicated that his Government would be requesting the technical assistance of the ILO on the matter.

The Worker members considered that the discussion and what was at stake in this case were sufficiently clear. They reiterated that the Government could request the technical assistance from the Office.

The Employers members recalled that people had already been seriously affected by asbestos. They hoped that help would soon be provided to those concerned. They reiterated that the issue here was compliance with Convention No. 162 irrespective of the express intention to meet European standards. Obligations resulting from this Convention should be met as soon as possible. They pointed out that accepting technical assistance would be the right way to go.

The Committee took note of the information communicated by the Government representative of Croatia, who recognized the seriousness of the situation, as well as of the subsequent discussions. The Committee took careful note of the information provided by the Government, in particular on the multidisciplinary working group that dealt with the exposure of workers to asbestos, and on the ongoing revision of the laws and regulations concerning the management and the handling of waste containing asbestos. The Committee expressed the hope that the Government would modify as urgently as possible the legislation and adapt it to EU standards so as to ensure the application of the Convention in this regard. Given that the Convention was essential to the workers of this sector, it should not only be applied in law but also in practice. The Committee requested the Government to adopt adequate measures in coordination and cooperation with the most representative organizations and other people concerned, with respect to health risks due to the exposure to asbestos as well as preventative and monitoring measures. The Committee took note of the interest of the Government in receiving technical assistance from the Office and it hoped that a request would be made along those lines.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comments: direct request and observation

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on occupational safety and health (OSH), the Committee considers it appropriate to examine the following Conventions together: Conventions Nos 45 (underground work (women), 139 (occupational cancer), 148 (working environment (air pollution, noise and vibration), 155 (OSH), 161 (occupational health services) and 162 (asbestos).

The Committee notes the observation of the Independent Trade Unions of Croatia (NHS) on Convention No. 155 received on 31 August 2023.

• General provisions

Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155)

Articles 4 and 7 of the Convention. Review of the national OSH policy. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report that the National Plan for Labour, Labour Protection and Employment (2021–27), has been adopted, as well as a corresponding Action Plan for its implementation between 2021 and 2024. The Government also indicates that the National Council for Work Safety meets periodically to discuss issues relating to improving occupational health and safety, and that information on its sessions is published online. The Committee also notes the observations made by the Independent Trade Unions of Croatia (NHS), which states that the frequency of meetings of the National Council are insufficient given the OSH problems in the country. The NHS also states that there is an imbalance in the composition of the Council, with the Government having three members and the social partners each having two. The union further states that the labour inspectorate should also be granted representation as a member of the body, given its importance in implementing and monitoring OSH regulations. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to ensure the implementation of the National Plan for Labour, Labour Protection and Employment (2021 - 2027) and its corresponding action plan. It requests the Government to pursue its efforts to ensure regular meetings of the National Council for Work Safety, and to continue to provide information on the issues discussed.

Articles 5(d), 19(b), (c), (e) and 20. Rights of safety and health representatives. Communication and cooperation between management and workers and/or their representatives. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that the Ministry of Labour, Pension System, Family and Social Policy has issued a Guidance on the election of OSH representatives in order to facilitate the process of electing representatives in accordance with the Acts and Regulations. The Committee notes that the NHS states that the election of OSH representatives requires a complicated and lengthy procedure, discouraging workers from participating. The union also indicates that, in order to increase the number of OSH representatives, a trade union should have the right to appoint one in cases where a representative has not been elected (as is currently the case in the public sector). The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the measures taken to ensure the implementation in practice of the provisions of the OSH Act concerning the election of OSH representatives (sections 70 and 101(7)), and to provide statistical information on the number of undertakings with workers’ safety representatives.

Articles 6 and 15. Functions and responsibilities. Coordination. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that changes have been made to the institutional structure regarding occupational safety and health, with the Croatian Institute for Health Protection and Safety at Work (CIHPSW) being incorporated into the Croatian Institute of Public Health (CIPH) and the responsibilities of the Institute for the Improvement of Safety at Work being taken over by the Ministry of Labour, Pension System, Family and Social Policy. In addition, the Government refers to cooperation between the labour inspectorate and the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Ministry of Finance and other bodies for the exchange of data, drafting of regulations, implementation of policies and campaigns. In this respect, the NHS states that there is currently no institution with sole responsibility for issues related to OSH in a comprehensive manner, while the Ministry of Health, to which the CIPH is linked, is not active on matters of occupational safety. The NHS also indicates that the Ministry of Health has not yet adopted all the ordinances required by section 103 of the OSH Act 2014. The Committee requests the Government to provide additional information on measures taken to ensure the necessary coordination between the CIPH under the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Labour, Pension System, Family and Social Policy and the labour inspectorate on issues of occupational safety and health, and to provide information regarding the work on OSH carried out by the CIPH.

Articles 9 and 10. Enforcement and guidance to employers and workers. Taking into account that Croatia has ratified Convention No. 81 (labour inspection) and Convention No. 129 (labour inspection in agriculture), the Committee refers to its comments adopted in 2022 regarding the application of these two Conventions, including with regard to: Articles 3(1)(b) and 17(2) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(b) and 22(2) of Convention No. 129 (technical information and advice on OSH); and Articles 5(a), 14 and 21(g) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 12, 19 and 27(g) of Convention No. 129 (notification of cases of occupational diseases).

Article 11(c) and (e). Functions to be carried out progressively, including the establishment and application of procedures for the notification of occupational accidents and diseases by employers and the annual publication of information on occupational accidents and diseases. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that, following the incorporation of the CIHPSW into the CIPH, the CIPH became the body responsible for data on work-related injuries based on reports submitted by the Croatian Health Insurance Fund (CHIF), and that information on rates of occupational diseases is available on the CIPH website. The Committee requests the Government for information regarding whether there is any cooperation between the Ministry of Labour, Pension System, Family and Social Policy and other bodies such as the CIPH for the production of annual statistics on occupational diseases.

Article 11(d). Holding of inquiries. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in response to its previous request on the holding of inquiries that it is within the scope of the functions assigned to labour inspectors to conduct supervisory inspection when there is an event that causes the death of a person on the employer’s premises or when it causes an injury to a worker or person in the workplace for whom emergency medical assistance has been provided. This supervision must take place immediately after inspectors receive notification of the event’s occurrence from the employer, worker, policy or doctor responsible for first aid care. The Committee takes note of this information, which responds to its previous request.

Article 12. Obligations of persons who design, manufacture, import, provide or transfer machinery, equipment or substances for occupational use. The Committee once again notes that section 5 and Annex I of the Ordinance on Machinery Safety (No. 28/11) establishes the obligation for machinery manufacturers and their authorised representatives to comply with health and safety requirements, but does not extend it to persons who design, import, provide or transfer machinery, equipment or substances for occupational use. Therefore, the Committee requests once again the Government to provide information regarding the measures taken to prescribe the obligations of persons who design, import, provide or transfer machinery, as well as those who design, manufacture, import, provide or transfer equipment or substances for occupational use, in accordance with Article 12(a), (b) and (c) of the Convention.

Article 14. Measures for the inclusion of questions of occupational safety and health at all levels of education and training. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that an e-learning system has been implemented in the field of occupational safety through a European Social Fund project. The Committee also notes the observations made by the NHS that occupational health and safety issues have not yet been integrated into the education system at all levels. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to promote the inclusion of questions of OSH and the working environment at all levels of education and training, including higher technical, medical and professional education, in a manner which meets the training needs of all workers.

Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161)

Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention. National policy and plans to progressively develop occupational health services. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the National Plan for Labour, Labour Protection and Employment (2021–27), states that occupational medicine specialists should be more present at workplaces, and that there is an insufficient number of these specialists. With reference to its comment above on Articles 4 and 7 of Convention No. 155, the Committee requests that the Government provide detailed information on the implementation of the National Plan for Labour, Labour Protection and Employment in relation to strengthening of occupational health services and increasing the number of occupational medicine specialists.

Article 8. Cooperation between employers, workers and their representatives with respect to occupational health services. Application in practice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that cooperation in the field of occupational health services between employers, workers and their representatives is carried out through OSH committees. It also notes the Government’s indication that, although these committees must include a doctor specialising in occupational medicine, there is an insufficient number of such specialists. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to guarantee the participation in practice of occupational medicine specialists in OSH committees.

Article 9(1). Multidisciplinary nature of occupational health services and composition of personnel. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that, according to the Ordinance on Norms and Standards for the Performance of Health Activities (No. 52/2020), a medical team to conduct occupational health services must be composed of a doctor specialist in occupational medicine and a registered nurse. It also notes that for some groups of workers, according to the nature of the occupation and the work to be performed, there is specific legislation determining the inclusion of other medical specialities in mandatory health surveillance (such as for police officers, certain officials of the Ministry of the Interior and persons working in private protection). The Committee notes this information, which responds to the request made in the last comment.

Article 11. Qualifications of the personnel providing occupational health services. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that the Ordinance on Norms and Standards for the Performance of Health Activities (No. 52/2020) establishes that the doctors who make up the medical team conducting occupational health services must be specialised in occupational medicine. In relation to section 82(7) of the OSH Act 2014, the Government refers to the implementation of the Ordinance on Authorisations for Occupational Safety and Health Affairs (No. 58/2022), which, in sections 14 and 15, establishes conditions for granting authorisation to employers and natural or legal persons to carry out occupational safety work. The Committee notes the information provided, which responds to the previous request for information.

Article 12. Surveillance of workers’ health during working hours. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the provisions in the OSH Act stating that workers shall not incur costs relating to occupational safety and health and the Government’s statement that this includes requesting activities outside of working hours. The Committee requests the Government to confirm that, as far as possible, the surveillance of workers’ health in relation to work takes place during working hours, in accordance with Article 12 of the Convention.

Article 15. Occurrences of illness among workers and absence from work for health reasons. The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report that occupational health services are not currently informed on individual cases of ill health among workers and absence from work for health reasons, but that population-based data on accidents at work and occupational diseases is collected, analysed and published in the annual report of the CIPH. The Government also provides information regarding measures to ensure data collection and data sharing between the CHIF, CIPH and the labour inspectorate, and with the Statistical Office of the European Union in accordance with the Methodology of European Statistics on Accidents at Work (EUROSTAT). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to give effect to Article 15 of the Convention and guarantee that occupational health services are informed of occurrences of ill health amongst workers and absence from work for health reasons.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the number of full-time medical teams and part-time medical teams that have submitted occupational medicine reports to the Occupational Medical Service, the number of doctors specialising in occupational medicine employed by the Occupational Medical Service, the total number of examinations carried out and the number of people insured. The Committee notes that there has been a drop in the number of occupational medicine specialists employed by the Occupational Medical Service, from 158 in 2016 to 145 in 2022, while the number of doctors with other specialities has risen from 4 in 2016 to 27 in 2022. The Committee again requests the Government to provide information on the number of workplaces covered by occupational medicine specialists, and whether any measures are in place to ensure communication between occupational health services and general practitioners where necessary. Noting the Government’s indication that an insufficient number of occupational medicine specialists is a challenge, the Committee also requests the Government to report on measures planned to address this.

• Protection from specific risks

Occupational Cancer Convention, 1974 (No. 139)

Article 1(3) of the Convention. Periodic determination of carcinogenic substances and agents. The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government that the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals at Work, Exposure Limit Values and Biological Limit Values (No. 91/18 and 1/21) has adopted all the amendments made by the EU Directives regarding carcinogenic and mutagenic substances. The Committee also notes the information that the Ordinance on Testing the Working Environment (No. 16/16 and 120/22) determines the need for periodic measurement of hazardous substances in the workplace. The Committee notes this information, which responds to its previous request.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous request, regarding the number of labour inspections carried out in the field of occupational health and safety. It notes the information provided concerning the number of administrative measures adopted in cases where violations related to the undertaking of risk assessments for physical, chemical and biological hazards, as well as the use of hazardous chemicals (sections 45 to 49 of the OSH Act), have been identified. The Committee notes the information provided, which responds to the previous request for information.

Working Environment (Air Pollution, Noise and Vibration) Convention, 1977 (No. 148)

Article 4(2) of the Convention. Technical standards and codes of practice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that the Code of Conduct (provided for in section 13 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Exposure to Noise at Work (No. 46/08)) will be addressed in a new ordinance that is in the process of being drafted. The Committee requests that the Government continue to provide information on the drafting of the Code of Conduct provided for in section 13 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Exposure to Noise at Work (No. 46/08).

Article 8(3). Criteria for determining the hazards of exposure to air pollution, noise and vibration and exposure limits. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that section 4(4) of Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals at Work, Exposure Limit Values and Biological Limit Values (No. 91/18 and 1/21) establishes that the testing of the concentration of hazardous substances in the workplace must be based on a detailed knowledge of the technological process or work procedure, in order to determine the possibilities of occurrence of certain hazardous substances in the worker’s breathing zone, while section 4(8) establishes the calculation formula for cases of simultaneous exposure to several substances. The Committee also notes that, pursuant to section 5(6), in jobs where workers are simultaneously exposed to the influence of several hazardous chemicals, the risk must be assessed on the basis of the source of danger and harmfulness representing a combination of all the harmful chemicals present. The Committee notes the information provided, which responds to the previous request for information.

Article 9(a). Working environment to be kept free from any hazard due to air pollution, noise or vibration throughtechnical measures applied to new plant or processes in design or installation. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Ordinance on Occupational Safety for Workplaces (No. 105/20) establishes, in section 7, that the occupational health and safety provisions of the Ordinance and the other special regulations on the subject must be applied during construction by all involved, including investors, designers, contractors, supervising engineers and auditors. The Committee also notes that section 8 establishes that the construction work of workplaces must comply with OSH requirements, including noise protection, ensuring microclimate conditions and protection against harmful atmospheric and climatic influences. With regard to noise, the Committee notes that the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Exposure to Noise at Work (No. 48/08) states that the risks arising from exposure to noise must be eliminated at their source or reduced to a minimum by taking into account the design and planning of workplaces and worksites (section 7(1)(c)). With regard to vibration, it notes that Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Risks Due to Exposure to Vibrations at Work (No. 155/08) establishes that the development and implementation of a programme of technical or organizational measures to reduce exposure to mechanical vibration and associated risks to the lowest possible level must take into account the planning and layout of workplaces and work processes. The Committee notes this information, which responds to the request made in the previous comment.

Article 11(3) and (4). Provision of alternative employment, the right to maintain income, social security benefits or social insurance.The Committee requests further information regarding whether measures are taken or envisaged to ensure that the worker concerned is able to maintain his income through other measures if suitable alternative work is not found, in accordance with Article 11(3) of the Convention. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the rights of workers under social security or social insurance legislation are not adversely affected, in accordance with Article 11(4) of the Convention.

Article 12. Notification to the competent authority. The Committee notes that there is no provision in the legislation for notifying the competent authorities in cases of use of processes, substances, machinery and equipment that involve exposing workers to occupational risks due to noise and vibration. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures envisaged for notification to the competent authorities when processes, substances, machinery and equipment, which involve exposure of workers to occupational hazards in the working environment due to noise and vibration, are used.

Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162)

Articles 3(2) and 15 of the Convention. Periodic review in light of technical progress and advances in scientific knowledge, including review of limits for the exposure of workers to asbestos. The Committee notes the Government’s indication concerning exposure limits that it is awaiting the definition of new exposure limits by the European Commission (which is currently debating a proposal for a directive to amend Directive 2009/148/EC) in order to harmonize its legislation with the new guidelines. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the periodic review and update of exposure limits or other exposure criteria for asbestos.

Articles 5(2),10(b) and 17(1). Prohibition of the use of asbestos, appropriate penalties and demolition and removal work. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in response to the Committee’s previous request relating to the implementation of the ban of 2006 on the production, trade and usage of asbestos and asbestos containing materials that the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals at Work, Exposure Limit Values and Biological Limit Values (No. 91/18 and 1/21) also applies the provisions of this Convention. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that this Ordinance applies to the protection of workers from the risk of exposure to asbestos only where it prescribes a higher level of safety and health at work than that provided for in Directive 2009/148/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2009, and also sets the exposure limit for asbestos according to the one defined by Article 8 of the same Directive. The Committee further notes the Government’s statement that workers are exposed to asbestos in Croatia only in the process of demolition work or removal of asbestos. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide further information regarding the measures taken to give effect to Article 17(1) of the Convention, including the adoption of regulations foreseen in section 16 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07) on the conditions for demolition work.

Article 20(4). Right of workers or their representatives to request monitoring and appeal to the competent authorities. The Committee notes an absence of information on measures adopted to ensure, in law or in practice, that workers or their representatives have the right to request the monitoring of the working environment and to appeal to the competent authority concerning the results of the monitoring. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information regarding the manner in which effect has been given to Article 20(4) of the Convention.

Article 21(4). Means of maintaining workers’ income. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that in case of occupational diseases and sick leave for occupational diseases, all medical costs and sick leave are compensated through the CHIF pursuant to the Ordinance on rights, conditions and manner of exercising the rights from the compulsory health insurance in the event of injury at work and occupational disease. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the implementation of Article 21(4) of the Convention, including statistical information on the compensation provided by the CHIF in cases where continued assignment to work involving exposure to asbestos is found to be medically inadvisable.

Article 21(5). System of notification of occupational diseases caused by asbestos. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that the CIPH is notified of all asbestos-related occupational diseases in the country, and it notes the statistics provided on cases notified. The Committee also notes that the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals at Work, Exposure Limit Values and Biological Limit Values (No. 91/18 and 1/21) establishes in section 16(7)(c) the obligation to notify the body responsible for labour inspection or the institute responsible for health protection at work. The Committee takes note of this information, which responds to its previous request.

Article 22(2) and (3). Written policies and procedures for the education and periodic training of workers on hazards due to asbestos. Information about health hazards related to the work, instructions in preventive measures and correct work practices and continuing training in these fields. The Committee notes the Government’s information, in response to the previous comment, that the CIPH does not keep records of workers who have undergone training regarding the risks associated with asbestos. Taking note of the provisions on training in the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07), the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which it ensures the education and periodic training of workers on asbestos hazards and methods of prevention and control, in accordance with Articles 22(2) and (3) of the Convention.

• Protection in specific branches of activity

Underground Work (Women) Convention, 1935 (No. 45)

The Committee recalls that the ILO Governing Body (at its 334th Session, October–November 2018), on the recommendation of the Standards Review Mechanism (SRM) Tripartite Working Group, classified Convention No. 45 as an outdated instrument, and has placed an item on the agenda of the 113th Session of the International Labour Conference (2024) concerning its abrogation. The Governing Body also requested the Office to follow-up with member States currently bound by Convention No. 45 to encourage the ratification of up-to-date instruments concerning OSH, including but not limited to the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176), and to undertake a campaign to promote the ratification of Convention No. 176.

The Committee therefore encourages the Government to follow up the Governing Body’s decision at its 334th Session (October–November 2018) approving the recommendations of the SRM Tripartite Working Group and to consider ratifying the most up-to-date instruments in this subject area. The Committee takes this opportunity to recall that in June 2022, the International Labour Conference added the principle of a safe and healthy working environment to the Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, thus amending the 1998 Declaration on Principles and Fundamental Rights at Work. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the possibility of requesting technical assistance from the Office for the purpose of bringing both the practice and the applicable legislation into conformity with the fundamental Conventions relating to OSH and to provide support for any consideration for ratification of the Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comments: Direct request and observation.

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on occupational safety and health (OSH), the Committee considers it appropriate to examine the Conventions Nos 155 (OSH), 161 (occupational health services) and 162 (asbestos) together.

A. General provisions

Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155)

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the data provided by the Government in its report related to notifications of accidents at work, including the total number of fatalities at work and the overall accident rate by branch of activity. The Committee notes that the total number of recorded cases of occupational diseases increased between 2020 and 2022, with 264 in 2020, 1,700 in 2021 and 1,370 in 2022. According to the information provided by the Government, the rise in occupational diseases in 2021 and 2022 was related to the COVID-19 pandemic, which corresponded to the cause of almost 95 per cent of recognized occupational diseases in the period. The Committee requests the Government to pursue its efforts to ensure the application of ratified OSH Conventions and to continue to provide statistics on the occupational accidents and cases of occupational diseases.

Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161)

Article 5(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (g), (h), (i) and (k) of the Convention. Functions of occupational health services. The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government, concerning the adoption of ordinances concerning various risks, which set out the functions of occupational health services. The Ordinance on the protection of workers from exposure to dangerous chemicals at work, exposure limit values, and biological limit values (No. 91/18) stipulates that a risk assessment in workplaces where workers are exposed to hazardous chemicals should take into account, where possible, conclusions resulting from the health surveillance of workers to be carried out by an occupational health specialist. The Ordinance specifies that health surveillance includes a workplace tour. The Ordinance on the protection of workers from risks due to exposure to biological agents at work (No. 129/20) establishes conditions for mandatory health surveillance, to be conducted by the competent occupational health specialist or another authorized body, and specifies that the specialist or body should also propose all necessary protective or preventive measures for the workers covered by health surveillance. The Ordinance on the protection at work of workers exposed to stato-dynamic, psycho-physiological, and other efforts at work (No. 73/21) provides that when a major psycho-social risk has been assessed in the risk assessment, occupational health specialists and, if necessary, psychologists should participate in the development and implementation of preventive measures. These specialists should also participate in the education of workers on the prevention of such risks and should take appropriate measures when they notice signs and symptoms of diseases that may be caused by these risks. The Ordinance provides that, through a specialist in occupational medicine, the employer should ensure that workers are informed of certain health risks. The Committee requests the Government to indicate if the specialists of the Occupational Medical Service perform any of the functions outlined in Article 5(d) (testing and evaluation of new equipment), (g) (adaptation of work), (h) (vocational rehabilitation) and (k) (analysis of accidents and diseases).

B. Protection from specific risks

Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162)

Effective compensation of workers of the Salonit factory. In response to the previous comment on the appeals lodged against the compensation claims by the workers of the Salonit factory, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Commission for Settlement of Compensation Claims of Workers Suffering from Occupational Diseases Due to Exposure to Asbestos as of 13 July 2023 had received 2,028 compensation claims in total and settled all claims. The Committee notes this information, which responds to the question raised in its previous request.

The Commission for Settling Claims for Compensation by Workers Suffering from Occupational Diseases Due to Exposure to Asbestos. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that the current Commission, appointed by the Government on 13 December 2018, received 297 requests, of which 260 were deemed to be well-founded, 34 deemed unfounded and 3 requests were withdrawn. It also notes the Government’s indication that the website of the Croatian Health Insurance Fund contains instructions on how to submit a request for compensation. The Committee notes this information, which responds to the request made in the last comment.

Application of the Convention in practice. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government that, according to data collected between 2018 and 2022, the numbers of diseases related to exposure to asbestos is declining overall, from 57 cases in 2018 to 45 cases in 2022. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information regarding the application in practice of the Convention, including the implementation of the prohibition on the usage of asbestos and asbestos-containing materials in Croatia and the number of occupational diseases reported.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on occupational safety and health (OSH), the Committee considers it appropriate to examine the following Conventions together: Conventions Nos 45 (underground work (women)), 139 (occupational cancer), 148 (working environment (air pollution, noise and vibration)), 155 (OSH), 161 (occupational health services) and 162 (asbestos). The Committee recalls that in its previous comments, it had noted the adoption by the Government of a list of legislation related to labour inspection and OSH, and had requested the Government to provide detailed reports on the application of these Conventions.

The Committee notes the observations of the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia (UATUC) and the Independent Trade Unions of Croatia (NHS) on Conventions Nos 155, 161 and 162, received in 2016.

A. General provisions

Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155)

Articles 4 and 7 of the Convention. Review of the national OSH policy. The Committee previously noted the adoption of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (Nos 71/14, 118/14, 154/14) (OSH Act 2014). It notes that, pursuant to section 6(1) of the OSH Act 2014, the Government systematically monitors the state of OSH in the country and, in consultation with representatives of employers and workers, identifies, proposes, implements and systematically reviews the OSH policy, and proposes amendments to legislation in order to improve safety and protect the health of employees. Section 7(1) of the OSH Act 2014 further sets out that the tripartite National Council for Work Safety monitors, analyses and evaluates the national OSH policy and system, informs the Government of its findings, and proposes necessary changes. The Committee notes, however, that the UATUC and NHS allege that the national OSH policy lacks coherence, and that revisions to the policy occur only when obligations under European Union (EU) legislation make it necessary to do so. The UATUC and NHS also indicate that there has been no new national programmes on OSH after the National Programme of Occupational Safety and Health for the period 2009–13. The Committee notes that, in its report on the application of Convention No. 161, the Government refers to section 6 of the OSH Act 2014, pursuant to which the Ministry of Labour and Pension System shall, in cooperation with the tripartite National Council for Work Safety, propose for adoption a national programme on OSH for a period of five years, with clearly defined activities.The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which it ensures the coherence of the national OSH policy and on its periodic review, including the frequency of the meetings of the National Council for Work Safety, the scope of its reviews and the issues discussed, as well as any resulting proposals made.

Articles 5(d), 19(b), (c), (e) and 20. Rights of safety and health representatives. Communication and cooperation at the level of the working group and the undertaking, between management and workers and/or their representatives. The Committee notes that the OSH Act 2014 provides for the election of workers’ safety representatives in sections 70 and 101(7), and in section 34, the establishment of an OSH committee in undertakings with 50 or more employees, consisting of the employer or his authorized officer, the OSH specialist, the occupational medicine specialist, and the workers’ safety representative or their coordinator. The Committee further notes that employers’ obligations under the OSH Act 2014 include: informing employees and the workers’ safety representative of all the risks and changes which might affect the health and safety of employees (section 32(1)); making available the appropriate documentation to the workers’ safety representative (section 32(5)); and consulting in advance and in a timely manner with the workers’ safety representative (sections 31 and 33). It further notes that, pursuant to section 71(2) of the OSH Act 2014, the workers’ safety representative’s rights include being present at inspection visits, raising objections to inspection findings if appropriate and involving a competent inspector, should a representative find that the health and safety of employees has been endangered and the employer fails or refuses to implement OSH measures. In this respect, the UATUC and the NHS observed that, in practice, there is a problem with workers’ representatives not being present at inspection visits, and noted that they are only invited to sign the inspection report, but not to be present during the determination of all the relevant facts during the inspection, so that they are, in effect, not entitled to submit objections to inspection reports. The UATUC and the NHS further noted that in small undertakings, there are minimal possibilities for workers’ representatives to be elected, and that at some workplaces, workers’ representatives do not have influence on employers’ decisions, and are not consulted as required by the OSH Act 2014.The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure the implementation in practice of sections 70 and 101(7) of the OSH Act 2014 concerning the election of safety representatives and to provide information on the application of Article 19(b), (c) and (e) of the Convention in practice, including statistics on the number of undertakings with workers’ safety representatives.

Articles 6 and 15. Functions and responsibilities. Coordination. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report regarding the OSH functions and responsibilities of various institutions and stakeholders. It notes in this respect that section 1 of the OSH Act 2014 establishes the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement, which systematically monitors the situation on occupational safety in Croatia, improves it through professional and administrative support, carries out research, provides advice, and undertakes preventive measures in the field of OSH. The Government further indicates in its report on the application of Convention No. 161 that the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement is working on a data collector which will be the central information system in the field of OSH. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Croatian Institute for Health Protection and Safety at Work (CIHPSW), an independent health institution at national level, analyses occupational injuries, provides guidelines for employers, and actively trains in the domain of occupational health protection. It notes the observations of the UATUC and the NHS that there are some overlaps between the activities of the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement and those of the CIHPSW, and that there is a lack of coordination between the policies and activities of these two bodies and the Ministry of Labour and Pension System. In addition, in its report on the application of Convention No. 161, the Government also refers to the existence of a working group on OSH, involving the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Labour and Pension System, the labour inspectorate, the CIHPSW, the Croatian Institute for Health Insurance, the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement and other entities, the coordinated activities of which have resulted in the application and development of preventive measures in the protection of OSH, the strengthening of professional platforms in the provision of information pertaining to OSH, and improved cooperation and communication with target groups.The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to ensure the necessary coordination between the Ministry of Labour and Pension System, the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement, the CIHPSW, and the labour inspectorate. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information regarding the work of the working group on OSH involving the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Labour and Pension System, the labour inspectorate, the CIHPSW, the Croatian Institute for Health Insurance, the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement and other entities, including detailed information on the frequency, outcomes, and impact of its meetings. In addition, the Committee once again requests information regarding the manner in which cooperation between the labour inspectorate and inspection services in other areas is carried out.

Articles 9 and 10. Guidance to employers and workers. Taking into account that Croatia has ratified Convention No. 81 (labour inspection) and Convention No. 129 (labour inspection in agriculture), the Committee refers to its comments adopted in 2018 regarding the application of these two Conventions, including with regard to: Articles 3(1)(b) and 17(2) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(b) and 22(2) of Convention No. 129 (technical information and advice on OSH); Article 3(2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(3) of Convention No. 129 (additional functions of labour inspectors); Articles 3(2), 10 and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(3), 14 and 21 of Convention No. 129 (number of labour inspectors); Articles 5(a), 14 and 21(g) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 12, 19 and 27(g) of Convention No. 129 (notification of cases of occupational diseases); Articles 5(a), 17 and 18 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 12, 22(1) and 24 of Convention No. 129 (penalties); and Articles 5(a), 20 and 21 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 12, 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129 (annual report of the labour inspectorate).

Article 11(c) and (e). Functions to be carried out progressively, including the establishment and application of procedures for the notification of occupational accidents and diseases by employers and the annual publication of information on occupational accidents and diseases. The Committee notes that section 65 of the OSH Act 2014 sets out the duty for employers to notify cases of serious or fatal injuries to the body competent for inspections, immediately after the injury has occurred. With regard to the annual production of statistics and annual publication of information, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report on the application of Convention No. 81 that the Croatian Health Insurance Fund provides the labour inspectorate with monthly updated data on all occupational accidents which have occurred in the country and on the recognized occupational diseases. The Committee further notes that, pursuant to section 83 of the OSH Act 2014, the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement conducts statistical surveys on OSH as part of its mandate. The annual report of the labour inspectorate also provides information regarding its work in the field of occupational safety.The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the statistical surveys conducted by the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement, including their frequency, their scope, and whether there is any cooperation between the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement and other bodies such as the Croatian Health Insurance Fund, when it comes to the production of annual statistics on occupational accidents and diseases.

Article 11(d). Holding of inquiries. The Committee notes that, pursuant to section 32(9) of the OSH Act 2014, in the event of fatal or severe injury, the employer is obliged to call the workers’ safety representative to carry out an investigation at the workplace.The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the procedures in place for the holding of inquiries, where cases of occupational accidents, occupational diseases or any other injuries to health which arise in the course of or in connection with work appear to reflect situations which are serious.

Article 12. Obligations of persons who design, manufacture, import, provide or transfer machinery, equipment or substances for occupational use. The Committee notes that the information provided by the Government on the application of this provision relates to the duties of employers. With regard to machinery, it notes that section 5 and Annex I of the Ordinance on Machinery Safety (No. 28/11) sets out health and safety requirements to be complied with by manufacturers and their authorized representatives.The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to prescribe the obligations of persons who design, manufacture, import, provide or transfer machinery, equipment or substances for occupational use, in accordance with Article 12(a), (b) and (c) of the Convention.

Article 14. Measures for the inclusion of questions of occupational safety and health at all levels of education and training. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the Ordinance on Training in Occupational Health and Safety and on Competence Examinations (No. 112/14), which includes provisions for the methods and conditions of professional examinations for OSH coordinators, and of continuing professional training. The Committee also notes that section 29 of the OSH Act 2014 requires employers and their authorized officers to be educated and professionally trained in the field of OSH, in accordance with the risk assessment of the enterprise.The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to promote the inclusion of questions of OSH and the working environment at all levels of education and training, including higher technical, medical and professional education, in a manner which meets the training needs of all workers. In this respect, it also requests the Government to provide further information regarding the implementation of the Ordinance on Training in Occupational Safety and Health and on Competence Examinations (No. 112/14) and its impact on OSH in undertakings.

Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161)

Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention. National policy and plans to progressively develop occupational health services. The Committee previously noted that the National Programme of Occupational Safety and Health for the period 2009–13 included specific policies concerning occupational health services, such as strategic goals to improve the efficiency of and access to occupational health services and to monitor the health of workers. In this respect, the Committee notes the observations of the UATUC and the NHS alleging that, as of 2016, the Government had not adopted a new national programme following the National Programme of Occupational Safety and Health for the period 2009–13, and that the Programme had not been periodically reviewed or evaluated.With reference to its comment above on Articles 4 and 7 of Convention No. 155, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information regarding any new national programme that has been proposed pursuant to section 6 of the OSH Act 2014, including its goals in relation to occupational health services, the manner in which the most representative organisations of employers and workers are consulted, the impact of its implementation for the progressive development of occupational health services for all workers, and the manner in which the programme is periodically reviewed.

Article 8. Cooperation between employers, workers and their representatives with respect to occupational health services. Application in practice. The Committee notes that the requirement in section 34(1) and (3) of the OSH Act 2014 setting up an OSH committee in undertakings with 50 or more employees involves the participation of the occupational medicine specialist appointed in accordance with a special regulation. Section 34 of the OSH Act 2014 further stipulates that the employer employing fewer than 50 employees shall be obliged to set up an OSH committee if prescribed to do so by a special law or regulation. The Committee notes the indication by the UATUC and the NHS that there is no data regarding the participation of occupational medicine specialists in OSH committees, or their influence in such committees, and that there is an insufficient number and unequal territorial distribution of occupational medicine specialists in the country. The Government also states that, in practice, employers rarely consult occupational medicine specialists when carrying out risk assessments.The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the manner in which the employer, workers and their representatives, where they exist, cooperate and participate in the implementation of the organisational and other measures relating to occupational health services on an equitable basis, including information on the participation in practice of occupational medicines specialists in OSH committees.

Article 9(1) and (3). Multidisciplinary nature of occupational health services and composition of personnel. Cooperation between occupational health services and other bodies concerned with the provision of health services. The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that occupational health services are multidisciplinary and on the criteria according to which their composition is determined, in accordance with Article 9(1) of the Convention. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure adequate cooperation and coordination between occupational health services and other bodies concerned with the provision of health services, in accordance with Article 9(3) of the Convention.

Article 11. Qualifications of the personnel providing occupational health services. The Committee notes that the Government refers to section 27 of the Health Care Act, which includes the qualifications of healthcare professionals at the primary level, described under section 26 of the Health Care Act as including different types of healthcare and occupational medicine. In addition, the Committee notes that, under section 82(3) and (7) of the OSH Act 2014, a person may be authorized to provide training in safe working practices, in accordance with conditions to be stipulated in Ordinances to be adopted by the Minister.The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the qualifications required for the personnel providing occupational health services. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on any Ordinances that have been adopted pursuant to section 82(7) of the OSH Act 2014.

Article 12. Surveillance of workers’ health during working hours. The Committee notes that section 64(2) of the OSH Act 2014 stipulates that the employee shall not bear the costs of previous and periodic examinations, or of obtaining a certificate stating that they meet the special requirements for employment, in accordance with the relevant OSH rules and regulations. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, as per section 21 of the Health Care Act, workers are entitled to specific medical healthcare (occupational medical services) under the Mandatory Health Insurance Act (Nos 80/13, 137/13), which is mandatory for all persons employed in the private or public sectors. The Government also indicates that the cost of medical examinations are borne by the Croatian Institute for Health Insurance.The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that surveillance of workers’ health in relation to work shall take place as far as possible during working hours, in accordance with Article 12 of the Convention.

Article 15. Occurrences of illness among workers and absence from work for health reasons. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to give effect to Article 15 of the Convention.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the observations of the UATUC and the NHS that there is a lack of occupational medicine specialists in the country, and a missing link between general practitioners and occupational medicine specialists, as general practitioners and other specialized doctors do not recognize that changes in the workers’ health are a consequence of working conditions.The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the application of the Convention in practice, including information on the number of workers covered by the legislation, the number of occupational medicine specialists hired and the number of workplaces that they cover, and whether any measures are in place to ensure communication between occupational health services and general practitioners where necessary.

B. Protection from specific risks

Occupational Cancer Convention, 1974 (No. 139)

Article 1(3) of the Convention. Periodic determination of carcinogenic substances and agents. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, since its accession to the European Union, the Government adheres to EU regulations concerning hazardous chemicals and carcinogenic, mutagenic or reprotoxic products and substances. The Committee also notes with interest the adoption of a number of pieces of legislation since the Government’s last report, including the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15), which defines carcinogens and mutagens in accordance with the EU Regulation on Classification, Labelling and Packaging (No. 1272/2008) and lays down minimum requirements for protection against carcinogens and/or mutagens.The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on developments related to its periodic determination of the carcinogenic substances and agents to which occupational exposure shall be prohibited or made subject to authorisation or control.

Article 2. Replacement of carcinogenic substances and agents. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous request regarding information on measures taken to ensure the full application of Article 2of the Convention. In particular, the Committee notes that, pursuant to section 46(1) of the OSH Act 2014, the employer is required to continuously improve OSH by applying less hazardous and harmful technologies, work procedures and work substances. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that, pursuant to section 5 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15), the employer shall replace carcinogens and/or mutagens at the workplace with harmless or less harmful substances, compounds or procedures, which, depending on the situation and usage conditions, are not harmful or are less harmful for the workers’ health and safety. In addition, section 6 of the Ordinance provides that employers are required to keep the number of exposed workers to the minimum possible.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the register of incidences of occupational diseases and the CIHPSW’s form for employers to complete on workers who work with carcinogens and mutagens, including the indication that, by the end of 2015, the CIHPSW had received information from 18 employers covering a total of 168 workers exposed to carcinogens and mutagens, with 159 workers having gone through medical examinations prior to work with carcinogens and mutagens, and 164 having gone through periodical medical examinations during the work period.The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide details on its appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied in the country, including information regarding inspections carried out and the number and nature of the contraventions reported.

Working Environment (Air Pollution, Noise and Vibration) Convention, 1977 (No. 148)

Article 4(2) of the Convention. Technical standards and codes of practice. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether it has developed or intends to develop any technical standards or codes of practice relating to air pollution, noise or vibration, including the Code of Conduct envisaged under section 13 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Exposure to Noise at Work (No. 46/08).

Article 8(3). Criteria for determining the hazards of exposure to air pollution, noise and vibration and exposure limits. The Committee notes that section 7(1) of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Exposure to Noise at Work (No. 46/08) and section 6(1) of the Ordinance on Protecting Workers from Risks Arising from Exposure to Vibration at Work (No. 155/08) specify that technical progress should be taken into account when reducing risks from noise and vibrations to a minimum.The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information regarding the manner in which it is ensured that criteria and exposure limits are revised regularly in the light of current national and international knowledge and data, taking into account as far as possible any increase in occupational hazards resulting from simultaneous exposure to several harmful factors at the workplace, in accordance with Article 8(3) of the Convention.

Article 9. Working environment to be kept free from any hazard due to air pollution, noise or vibration. The Committee notes that, under section 46(1) of the OSH Act 2014, the employer is obliged to continuously improve OSH by applying less hazardous and harmful technologies, work procedures and substances. The Committee also notes the Government’s reference to a number of provisions in national legislation providing for the requirement to eliminate or reduce the risks linked with exposure to noise, vibration, hazardous chemicals, carcinogens or mutagens and asbestos in workplaces, namely: section 47 of the OSH Act 2014; section 7 of the Ordinance on Protection of Workers from Exposure to Noise at Work (No. 46/08); section 6 of the Ordinance on Protecting Workers from Risks Arising from Exposure to Vibration at Work (No. 155/08); section 7 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals at Work (No. 91/15); section 7 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15); and section 7 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07).The Committee requests the Government to provide information on steps taken with respect to technical measures applied to new plant or processes in design or installation, with a view to ensuring that, as far as possible, the working environment is kept free from any hazard due to air pollution, noise or vibration, in accordance with Article 9(a) of the Convention.

Article 11(1). Provision of periodical surveillance of the health of workers exposed or liable to be exposed to occupational hazards due to noise and vibration. The Committee notes the Government’s reference, in response to its previous request concerning the application of Article 11(1),to section 36 of the OSH Act 2014, which sets out requirements for medical check-ups both prior to and during employment involving the performance of work with special working conditions. The Government also refers to section 3(18) of the Ordinance on Special Conditions of Employment (No. 5/84), which includes workers exposed to physical or chemical hazards, noise and vibration in the categories of jobs with special working conditions. The Committee notes that, pursuant to section 103(5) and (6) of the OSH Act 2014, the regulations concerning work with special conditions and requirements to be met by workers performing such work, referred to in section 36(6) of the OSH Act 2014, should have been adopted within 90 days of the entry into force of the OSH Act 2014, and that the Ordinance on Special Conditions of Employment (No. 5/84) shall only be valid until such adoption. The Committee observes that the noise exposure level contemplated by the Ordinance on Special Conditions of Employment (No. 5/84) is higher than the permissible noise levels contemplated in the Annex of the Ordinance on Protection of Workers from Exposure to Noise at Work (No. 46/08).The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether it has taken measures to adopt the regulations envisaged under section 36(6) of the OSH Act 2014.

Article 11(3) and (4). Provision of alternative employment, the right to maintain income, social security benefits or social insurance. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, pursuant to section 40 of the OSH Act 2014, the employer is obliged to carry out special protection measures to prevent further damage to health and impairment of remaining work ability, for workers who have been diagnosed with an occupational disease, and for whom the competent expert body has determined, inter alia, a partial loss of work capacity. Section 40(3) of the OSH Act 2014 requires employers to adapt working conditions and organization of working hours, to remove the risks to safety and health, and to ensure the possibility of other appropriate work or work at a different site if adjustments are not technically feasible or justifiable. The Committee once again recalls that the Convention provides that a transfer to alternative employment is required when continued assignment is considered medically inadvisable, which in certain cases may be before any damage has occurred.The Committee asks the Government to indicate if the special protection measures referred to in section 40 of the OSH Act 2014 also cover the situation in which exposure to air pollution, noise or vibration is found to be medically inadvisable, even in cases where there is no occupational disease. The Committee also requests further information regarding whether measures are taken or envisaged to ensure that the worker concerned is able to maintain his income through other measures if suitable alternative work is not found, in accordance with Article 11(3) of the Convention. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the rights of workers under social security or social insurance legislation are not adversely affected, in accordance with Article 11(4) of the Convention.

Article 12. Notification to the competent authority. The Committee notes the various requirements to provide advance notification for work involving: the production and use of carcinogenic and/or mutagenic substances (section 9(1) of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15)); asbestos (section 5(1) of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07)); and biological agents (section 13 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Biological Agents at Work (No. 155/08)).The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to give full effect to this provision of the Convention in respect of noise and vibration.

Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162)

Articles 3(2) and 15 of the Convention. Periodic review in light of technical progress and advances in scientific knowledge, including review of limits for the exposure of workers to asbestos. The Committee notes that the Government refers in its report to a number of pieces of legislation applying the provisions of this Convention, including the List of Poisons whose Production, Transport and Use is Prohibited (No. 29/05); the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07); the Ordinance on the Method and Procedures for Asbestos Waste Management (No. 42/07); the Act on Mandatory Health Monitoring of Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos (No. 79/07); the Act to Amend and Supplement the Act on the List of Occupational Diseases (No. 107/07); the Ordinance on Conditions and Methods of Health Surveillance and Diagnostic Procedures when Suspecting Asbestos-related Occupational Diseases and the Criteria for Confirmation of Occupational Asbestos-related Disease (No. 134/08); the Act on Compensating Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos (Nos 79/07, 139/10); the Act on the Requirements for Obtaining an Old Age Pension by Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos (Nos 79/07, 149/09 and 139/10); the Ordinance on Limit Values of Exposure to Hazardous Substances at Work and on Biological Limit Values (Nos 13/09, 75/13); the OSH Act 2014; and the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Risks related to Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15).The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information regarding the manner in which technical progress and advances in scientific knowledge are taken into account in the periodic review of the national legislation regulating asbestos, including the periodic review and update of exposure limits or other exposure criteria for asbestos and the frequency and the procedures for such reviews.

Articles 5(2) and 10(b). Prohibition of the use of asbestos and appropriate penalties. The Government refers to the ban on the production, trade and usage of asbestos and asbestos containing materials in Croatia, which entered into force on 1 January 2006, and includes crocidolite. The Committee observes that the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07) includes crocidolite in the definition of asbestos. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15) also applies the provisions of this Convention. The Committee notes that section 5 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15) requires the employer to replace carcinogenic and/or mutagenic substances with harmless or less dangerous substances or preparations.The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the national laws or regulations provide for the necessary measures, including appropriate penalties, to ensure effective enforcement of and compliance with the provisions of this Convention. It also requests the Government to provide information regarding the implementation of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15) in relation to asbestos and asbestos-containing products.

Article 17(1). Demolition and removal work. The Committee notes that section 16 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07) refers to regulations defining the conditions for demolition of buildings and maintenance work involving asbestos.The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the measures taken to give effect to this provision of the Convention, including the regulations referred to in section 16 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07).

Article 19(1). Disposal of waste containing asbestos. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide further information on the application throughout the country of legislative measures requiring all work related to remediation to be carried out under expert supervision by an authorized company. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the procedures in place to handle and dispose of asbestos-containing waste. It notes the Ordinance on the Method and Procedures for Asbestos Waste Management (No. 42/07), which sets out measures for the prevention and reduction of asbestos contamination, and requires in section 7(3) that the work plan for the removal of asbestos or asbestos containing materials regulate, in particular, measures necessary for the protection of OSH of the workers and the obligation to use special protective equipment in line with special regulations on OSH. According to the information provided by the Government, the Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund concludes contracts for the construction of special cells, at landfills, designated for the disposal of waste containing asbestos. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has constructed 17 special cells for the disposal of asbestos in 13 counties. The Government provides a list of collectors with a contract with the Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund, regarding the collection, transportation, temporary storage, and delivery for disposal of construction waste containing asbestos in a specially constructed cell at the municipal waste landfill. The Committee notes that the document provided by the Government, dating from 2013 and entitled “Instruction on Handling Asbestos Containing Construction Waste Intended for Disposal on Specially Constructed Cells on Landfills for Non-Hazardous Waste”, requires the preparation of construction waste containing asbestos for the certified collectors.

Article 20(4). Right of workers or their representatives to request monitoring and appeal to the competent authorities. The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the manner in which effect has been given to Article 20(4) of the Convention.

Article 21(4). Means of maintaining workers’ income. The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that, when continued assignment to work involving exposure to asbestos is found to be medically inadvisable, every effort shall be made, consistent with national conditions and practice, to provide the workers concerned with other means of maintaining their income, in accordance with Article 21(4) of the Convention.

Article 21(5). System of notification of occupational diseases caused by asbestos. The Committee notes the indication by the Government that the CIHPSW gathers data on persons with asbestos-related health problems into their register and that this data is published annually online. Section 21(2) of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07) also refers to the requirement to notify established cases of asbestosis and mesothelioma in accordance with special regulations. The Government further notes that there is an extensive follow-up programme of workers exposed to asbestos, and preventive health monitoring programmes are in place for the surveillance of the health status of workers exposed to asbestos every three years, until 30 years after the last exposure.The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the notification procedures for asbestos-related occupational diseases to the CIHPSW as well as the regulations referred to in section 21(2) of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07).

Article 22(2) and (3). Written policies and procedures for the education and periodic training of workers on hazards due to asbestos. Information about health hazards related to the work, instructions in preventive measures and correct work practices and continuing training in these fields. The Committee notes that section 18 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07) requires information on health hazards to be provided by the employer to workers and their representatives. Section 15(2) of the Ordinance further provides that workers’ training programmes must enable workers to acquire skills and knowledge in relation to asbestos, including protective measures and the effects of asbestos on health. The Government also indicates that the employer must take measures to ensure that: workers and/or their representatives have access to the results of measurements of concentration of asbestos fibres in the working environment and are given interpretation of these results; and that workers and/or their representatives are informed as soon as possible about exceeding the maximum limit concentrations, and are consulted on the measures to be taken in an emergency, as well as informed of the measures which have been taken.The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the training provided to workers on asbestos hazards and methods of prevention and control.

C. Protection in specific branches of activity

Underground Work (Women) Convention, 1935 (No. 45)

The Committee recalls that the ILO Governing Body (at its 334th Session, October–November 2018), on the recommendation of the Standards Review Mechanism (SRM) Tripartite Working Group, classified Convention No. 45 as an outdated instrument, and has placed an item on the agenda of the 113th Session of the International Labour Conference (2024) concerning its abrogation. The Governing Body also requested the Office to follow-up with member States currently bound by Convention No. 45 to encourage the ratification of up-to-date instruments concerning OSH, including but not limited to the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176), and to undertake a campaign to promote the ratification of Convention No. 176.

The Committee therefore encourages the Government to follow up the Governing Body’s decision at its 334th Session (October–November 2018) approving the recommendations of the SRM Tripartite Working Group and to consider ratifying the most up-to-date instruments in this subject area.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes that the Government’s reports have not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on occupational safety and health (OSH), the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 155 (OSH), 161 (occupational health services) and 162 (asbestos) together.

The Committee notes the observations of the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia (UATUC) and the Independent Trade Unions of Croatia (NHS), received in 2016.

A. General provisions

Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155)

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the information in the registry of the Croatian Institute for Health Protection and Safety at Work (CIHPSW) for 2017, and notes with concern that the total number of recorded cases of occupational diseases increased between 2016 and 2017, from 153 in 2016 to 172 in 2017. It also notes the information that, according to the Annual Report in 2017 of the labour inspectorate, there were 22 fatalities at work in 2017.The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the manner in which the Convention is applied, and to continue to provide the number, nature and cause of occupational accidents and cases of occupational disease reported.Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161)

Articles 5(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (g), (h), (i) and (k) and 6 of the Convention. Establishment and functions of occupational health services. The Committee notes the repeal of the former Occupational Safety and Health Act by the OSH Act 2014, and recalls that sections 22 and 82 of the repealed legislation gave effect to Article 5 of the Convention. The Committee notes that section 80 of the OSH Act 2014 requires the employer to provide employees with occupational medical services so as to ensure health surveillance appropriate to risks, hazards and exertions during work with a view to protecting the health of employees. Section 81 of the OSH Act 2014 further provides that occupational medicine activities, as well as the plan and programme of health protection measures, shall be prescribed by special regulations on health protection and health insurance, and that the minimum hours that the occupational medicine specialist is required to be present at the workplace shall be stipulated in an Ordinance. In this respect, the Committee notes the observations of the UATUC and the NHS, stating that, as of 2016, the Ministry of Health had not adopted regulations prescribing elements such as the minimum hours the occupational medicine specialist has to spend at the workplace, or the procedures for administering first aid. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the occupational medicine specialist’s participation in risk assessments at the workplace is not prescribed by national legislation, and that experience indicates that the employer rarely consults occupational medicine specialists during such assessments in practice, even though Article 5(a) of the Convention prescribes that the functions of occupational health services shall include the identification and assessment of the risks from health hazards in the workplace. In addition, section 20 of the Health Care Act (as amended) sets out types of healthcare that fall within the category of specific healthcare for workers, but provides that the content of measures on specific healthcare of workers and the method for implementing them shall be laid down by the Minister of Health in an Ordinance at the proposal of the CIHPSW, subject to prior approval by the Minister of Labour and the Pension System. The UATUC and NHS indicate, however, that these measures have not been prescribed.Noting that the OSH Act 2014 does not directly give effect to the majority of the provisions of Article 5 and requires the adoption of special regulations that have yet to be adopted, the Committee urges the Government to provide the information on the measures taken to give full effect to Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention. The Committee further requests the Government to indicate whether measures have been taken to adopt special regulations concerning occupational health activities and the plan and programme of health protection measures, as envisaged by section 81 of the OSH Act 2014, as well as the Ordinances referred to in section 20 of the Health Care Act. The Committee requests the Government to provide the list of such regulations where they have been adopted.

B. Protection from specific risks

Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162)

Effective compensation of workers of the Salonit factory. In its previous comments, the Committee requested information regarding the application in practice of the Law on compensation of workers employed with Salonit d.d. (No. 84/11), pursuant to which workers employed in the Salonit factory (which manufactured asbestos products) when it declared bankruptcy in 2006 could apply for compensation within 60 days (section 2). In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the payment to the workers of compensation due to job loss was planned in instalments over two years in 2011 and 2012. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that all requests for compensation have been resolved, with all 170 workers from the Salonit factory being compensated where they were eligible for compensation and had submitted a request to the Fund for Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government regarding the establishment of an Ad-hoc Commission for Complaints to deal with appeals against the decisions taken by the Fund, consisting of representatives from the Ministry for Environmental Protection, Physical Planning and Construction, Ministry of Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Justice and Fund for Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency.The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any developments regarding this issue, including the number of appeals launched, and on the decisions taken by the Ad-hoc Commission for Complaints.

The Commission for Settling Claims for Compensation by Workers Suffering from Occupational Diseases Due to Exposure to Asbestos (the Commission). The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that, since the establishment of the Commission in 2007 until mid-2016, 1,318 claims had been resolved (1,072 resulting in compensation), 22 were pending before the courts, and 245 were yet to be resolved. The Committee notes the observations by the UATUC and the NHS, which provide different statistics regarding resolved and unresolved claims for compensation. The Committee also notes an absence of information regarding measures taken to raise the awareness of workers regarding possibilities for seeking redress.The Committee requests the Government to continue to ensure that all claims and requests for compensation by workers suffering from an occupational disease due to exposure to asbestos during the course of their employment are handled as expeditiously as possible. It requests the Government to provide information on progress in this respect, as well as on the measures taken to raise the awareness of such workers regarding the possibilities for seeking redress.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the registry of the CIHPSW on asbestos-induced occupational diseases, which are published annually online and includes up-to-date data and statistics on asbestos-induced diseases, broken down by geographical distribution, types of disease, gender, age, types of education and training and other metrics. The Committee notes that, according to the data of the CIHPSW, 89 cases of asbestos-induced occupational illnesses were registered in 2017, of which 79 (88.8 per cent) were men and ten (11.2 per cent) were women. In addition, the Committee notes that, according to the data of the CIHPSW, the percentage of occupational diseases caused by exposure to asbestos in 2017 was 52 per cent (89 out of 172 recorded cases).Noting the percentage, which remains high, of occupational diseases caused by asbestos, the Committee urges the Government to strengthen its efforts to ensure the medical surveillance in practice of workers that are or have been exposed to asbestos. The Committee further requests the Government to continue to provide information regarding the application of this Convention in practice, including any measures taken at the institutional level in the application of the Convention. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the application in practice of the prohibition on the usage of asbestos and asbestos-containing materials in Croatia, which entered into force on 1 January 2006.

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

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on occupational safety and health (OSH), the Committee considers it appropriate to examine the following Conventions together: Conventions Nos 45 (underground work (women)), 139 (occupational cancer), 148 (working environment (air pollution, noise and vibration)), 155 (OSH), 161 (occupational health services) and 162 (asbestos). The Committee recalls that in its previous comments, it had noted the adoption by the Government of a list of legislation related to labour inspection and OSH, and had requested the Government to provide detailed reports on the application of these Conventions.

The Committee notes the observations of the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia (UATUC) and the Independent Trade Unions of Croatia (NHS) on Conventions Nos 155, 161 and 162, received in 2016.

Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155)

Articles 4 and 7 of the Convention. Review of the national OSH policy. The Committee previously noted the adoption of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (Nos 71/14, 118/14, 154/14) (OSH Act 2014). It notes that, pursuant to section 6(1) of the OSH Act 2014, the Government systematically monitors the state of OSH in the country and, in consultation with representatives of employers and workers, identifies, proposes, implements and systematically reviews the OSH policy, and proposes amendments to legislation in order to improve safety and protect the health of employees. Section 7(1) of the OSH Act 2014 further sets out that the tripartite National Council for Work Safety monitors, analyses and evaluates the national OSH policy and system, informs the Government of its findings, and proposes necessary changes. The Committee notes, however, that the UATUC and NHS allege that the national OSH policy lacks coherence, and that revisions to the policy occur only when obligations under European Union (EU) legislation make it necessary to do so. The UATUC and NHS also indicate that there has been no new national programmes on OSH after the National Programme of Occupational Safety and Health for the period 2009–13. The Committee notes that, in its report on the application of Convention No. 161, the Government refers to section 6 of the OSH Act 2014, pursuant to which the Ministry of Labour and Pension System shall, in cooperation with the tripartite National Council for Work Safety, propose for adoption a national programme on OSH for a period of five years, with clearly defined activities. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which it ensures the coherence of the national OSH policy and on its periodic review, including the frequency of the meetings of the National Council for Work Safety, the scope of its reviews and the issues discussed, as well as any resulting proposals made.

Articles 5(d), 19(b), (c), (e) and 20. Rights of safety and health representatives. Communication and cooperation at the level of the working group and the undertaking, between management and workers and/or their representatives. The Committee notes that the OSH Act 2014 provides for the election of workers’ safety representatives in sections 70 and 101(7), and in section 34, the establishment of an OSH committee in undertakings with 50 or more employees, consisting of the employer or his authorized officer, the OSH specialist, the occupational medicine specialist, and the workers’ safety representative or their coordinator. The Committee further notes that employers’ obligations under the OSH Act 2014 include: informing employees and the workers’ safety representative of all the risks and changes which might affect the health and safety of employees (section 32(1)); making available the appropriate documentation to the workers’ safety representative (section 32(5)); and consulting in advance and in a timely manner with the workers’ safety representative (sections 31 and 33). It further notes that, pursuant to section 71(2) of the OSH Act 2014, the workers’ safety representative’s rights include being present at inspection visits, raising objections to inspection findings if appropriate and involving a competent inspector, should a representative find that the health and safety of employees has been endangered and the employer fails or refuses to implement OSH measures. In this respect, the UATUC and the NHS observed that, in practice, there is a problem with workers’ representatives not being present at inspection visits, and noted that they are only invited to sign the inspection report, but not to be present during the determination of all the relevant facts during the inspection, so that they are, in effect, not entitled to submit objections to inspection reports. The UATUC and the NHS further noted that in small undertakings, there are minimal possibilities for workers’ representatives to be elected, and that at some workplaces, workers’ representatives do not have influence on employers’ decisions, and are not consulted as required by the OSH Act 2014. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure the implementation in practice of sections 70 and 101(7) of the OSH Act 2014 concerning the election of safety representatives and to provide information on the application of Article 19(b), (c) and (e) of the Convention in practice, including statistics on the number of undertakings with workers’ safety representatives.

Articles 6 and 15. Functions and responsibilities. Coordination. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report regarding the OSH functions and responsibilities of various institutions and stakeholders. It notes in this respect that section 1 of the OSH Act 2014 establishes the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement, which systematically monitors the situation on occupational safety in Croatia, improves it through professional and administrative support, carries out research, provides advice, and undertakes preventive measures in the field of OSH. The Government further indicates in its report on the application of Convention No. 161 that the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement is working on a data collector which will be the central information system in the field of OSH. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Croatian Institute for Health Protection and Safety at Work (CIHPSW), an independent health institution at national level, analyses occupational injuries, provides guidelines for employers, and actively trains in the domain of occupational health protection. It notes the observations of the UATUC and the NHS that there are some overlaps between the activities of the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement and those of the CIHPSW, and that there is a lack of coordination between the policies and activities of these two bodies and the Ministry of Labour and Pension System. In addition, in its report on the application of Convention No. 161, the Government also refers to the existence of a working group on OSH, involving the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Labour and Pension System, the labour inspectorate, the CIHPSW, the Croatian Institute for Health Insurance, the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement and other entities, the coordinated activities of which have resulted in the application and development of preventive measures in the protection of OSH, the strengthening of professional platforms in the provision of information pertaining to OSH, and improved cooperation and communication with target groups. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to ensure the necessary coordination between the Ministry of Labour and Pension System, the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement, the CIHPSW, and the labour inspectorate. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information regarding the work of the working group on OSH involving the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Labour and Pension System, the labour inspectorate, the CIHPSW, the Croatian Institute for Health Insurance, the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement and other entities, including detailed information on the frequency, outcomes, and impact of its meetings. In addition, the Committee once again requests information regarding the manner in which cooperation between the labour inspectorate and inspection services in other areas is carried out.

Articles 9 and 10. Guidance to employers and workers. Taking into account that Croatia has ratified Convention No. 81 (labour inspection) and Convention No. 129 (labour inspection in agriculture), the Committee refers to its comments adopted in 2018 regarding the application of these two Conventions, including with regard to: Articles 3(1)(b) and 17(2) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(b) and 22(2) of Convention No. 129 (technical information and advice on OSH); Article 3(2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(3) of Convention No. 129 (additional functions of labour inspectors); Articles 3(2), 10 and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(3), 14 and 21 of Convention No. 129 (number of labour inspectors); Articles 5(a), 14 and 21(g) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 12, 19 and 27(g) of Convention No. 129 (notification of cases of occupational diseases); Articles 5(a), 17 and 18 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 12, 22(1) and 24 of Convention No. 129 (penalties); and Articles 5(a), 20 and 21 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 12, 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129 (annual report of the labour inspectorate).

Article 11(c) and (e). Functions to be carried out progressively, including the establishment and application of procedures for the notification of occupational accidents and diseases by employers and the annual publication of information on occupational accidents and diseases. The Committee notes that section 65 of the OSH Act 2014 sets out the duty for employers to notify cases of serious or fatal injuries to the body competent for inspections, immediately after the injury has occurred. With regard to the annual production of statistics and annual publication of information, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report on the application of Convention No. 81 that the Croatian Health Insurance Fund provides the labour inspectorate with monthly updated data on all occupational accidents which have occurred in the country and on the recognized occupational diseases. The Committee further notes that, pursuant to section 83 of the OSH Act 2014, the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement conducts statistical surveys on OSH as part of its mandate. The annual report of the labour inspectorate also provides information regarding its work in the field of occupational safety. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the statistical surveys conducted by the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement, including their frequency, their scope, and whether there is any cooperation between the Institute for Occupational Safety Improvement and other bodies such as the Croatian Health Insurance Fund, when it comes to the production of annual statistics on occupational accidents and diseases.

Article 11(d). Holding of inquiries. The Committee notes that, pursuant to section 32(9) of the OSH Act 2014, in the event of fatal or severe injury, the employer is obliged to call the workers’ safety representative to carry out an investigation at the workplace. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the procedures in place for the holding of inquiries, where cases of occupational accidents, occupational diseases or any other injuries to health which arise in the course of or in connection with work appear to reflect situations which are serious.

Article 12. Obligations of persons who design, manufacture, import, provide or transfer machinery, equipment or substances for occupational use. The Committee notes that the information provided by the Government on the application of this provision relates to the duties of employers. With regard to machinery, it notes that section 5 and Annex I of the Ordinance on Machinery Safety (No. 28/11) sets out health and safety requirements to be complied with by manufacturers and their authorized representatives. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to prescribe the obligations of persons who design, manufacture, import, provide or transfer machinery, equipment or substances for occupational use, in accordance with Article 12(a), (b) and (c) of the Convention.

Article 14. Measures for the inclusion of questions of occupational safety and health at all levels of education and training. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the Ordinance on Training in Occupational Health and Safety and on Competence Examinations (No. 112/14), which includes provisions for the methods and conditions of professional examinations for OSH coordinators, and of continuing professional training. The Committee also notes that section 29 of the OSH Act 2014 requires employers and their authorized officers to be educated and professionally trained in the field of OSH, in accordance with the risk assessment of the enterprise. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to promote the inclusion of questions of OSH and the working environment at all levels of education and training, including higher technical, medical and professional education, in a manner which meets the training needs of all workers. In this respect, it also requests the Government to provide further information regarding the implementation of the Ordinance on Training in Occupational Safety and Health and on Competence Examinations (No. 112/14) and its impact on OSH in undertakings.

Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161)

Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention. National policy and plans to progressively develop occupational health services. The Committee previously noted that the National Programme of Occupational Safety and Health for the period 2009–13 included specific policies concerning occupational health services, such as strategic goals to improve the efficiency of and access to occupational health services and to monitor the health of workers. In this respect, the Committee notes the observations of the UATUC and the NHS alleging that, as of 2016, the Government had not adopted a new national programme following the National Programme of Occupational Safety and Health for the period 2009–13, and that the Programme had not been periodically reviewed or evaluated. With reference to its comment above on Articles 4 and 7 of Convention No. 155, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information regarding any new national programme that has been proposed pursuant to section 6 of the OSH Act 2014, including its goals in relation to occupational health services, the manner in which the most representative organisations of employers and workers are consulted, the impact of its implementation for the progressive development of occupational health services for all workers, and the manner in which the programme is periodically reviewed.

Article 8. Cooperation between employers, workers and their representatives with respect to occupational health services. Application in practice. The Committee notes that the requirement in section 34(1) and (3) of the OSH Act 2014 setting up an OSH committee in undertakings with 50 or more employees involves the participation of the occupational medicine specialist appointed in accordance with a special regulation. Section 34 of the OSH Act 2014 further stipulates that the employer employing fewer than 50 employees shall be obliged to set up an OSH committee if prescribed to do so by a special law or regulation. The Committee notes the indication by the UATUC and the NHS that there is no data regarding the participation of occupational medicine specialists in OSH committees, or their influence in such committees, and that there is an insufficient number and unequal territorial distribution of occupational medicine specialists in the country. The Government also states that, in practice, employers rarely consult occupational medicine specialists when carrying out risk assessments. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the manner in which the employer, workers and their representatives, where they exist, cooperate and participate in the implementation of the organisational and other measures relating to occupational health services on an equitable basis, including information on the participation in practice of occupational medicines specialists in OSH committees.

Article 9(1) and (3). Multidisciplinary nature of occupational health services and composition of personnel. Cooperation between occupational health services and other bodies concerned with the provision of health services. The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that occupational health services are multidisciplinary and on the criteria according to which their composition is determined, in accordance with Article 9(1) of the Convention. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure adequate cooperation and coordination between occupational health services and other bodies concerned with the provision of health services, in accordance with Article 9(3) of the Convention.

Article 11. Qualifications of the personnel providing occupational health services. The Committee notes that the Government refers to section 27 of the Health Care Act, which includes the qualifications of healthcare professionals at the primary level, described under section 26 of the Health Care Act as including different types of healthcare and occupational medicine. In addition, the Committee notes that, under section 82(3) and (7) of the OSH Act 2014, a person may be authorized to provide training in safe working practices, in accordance with conditions to be stipulated in Ordinances to be adopted by the Minister. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the qualifications required for the personnel providing occupational health services. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on any Ordinances that have been adopted pursuant to section 82(7) of the OSH Act 2014.

Article 12. Surveillance of workers’ health during working hours. The Committee notes that section 64(2) of the OSH Act 2014 stipulates that the employee shall not bear the costs of previous and periodic examinations, or of obtaining a certificate stating that they meet the special requirements for employment, in accordance with the relevant OSH rules and regulations. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, as per section 21 of the Health Care Act, workers are entitled to specific medical healthcare (occupational medical services) under the Mandatory Health Insurance Act (Nos 80/13, 137/13), which is mandatory for all persons employed in the private or public sectors. The Government also indicates that the cost of medical examinations are borne by the Croatian Institute for Health Insurance. The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that surveillance of workers’ health in relation to work shall take place as far as possible during working hours, in accordance with Article 12 of the Convention.

Article 15. Occurrences of illness among workers and absence from work for health reasons. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to give effect to Article 15 of the Convention.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the observations of the UATUC and the NHS that there is a lack of occupational medicine specialists in the country, and a missing link between general practitioners and occupational medicine specialists, as general practitioners and other specialized doctors do not recognize that changes in the workers’ health are a consequence of working conditions. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the application of the Convention in practice, including information on the number of workers covered by the legislation, the number of occupational medicine specialists hired and the number of workplaces that they cover, and whether any measures are in place to ensure communication between occupational health services and general practitioners where necessary.

B. Protection from specific risks

Occupational Cancer Convention, 1974 (No. 139)

Article 1(3) of the Convention. Periodic determination of carcinogenic substances and agents. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, since its accession to the European Union, the Government adheres to EU regulations concerning hazardous chemicals and carcinogenic, mutagenic or reprotoxic products and substances. The Committee also notes with interest the adoption of a number of pieces of legislation since the Government’s last report, including the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15), which defines carcinogens and mutagens in accordance with the EU Regulation on Classification, Labelling and Packaging (No. 1272/2008) and lays down minimum requirements for protection against carcinogens and/or mutagens. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on developments related to its periodic determination of the carcinogenic substances and agents to which occupational exposure shall be prohibited or made subject to authorisation or control.

Article 2. Replacement of carcinogenic substances and agents. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous request regarding information on measures taken to ensure the full application of Article 2 of the Convention. In particular, the Committee notes that, pursuant to section 46(1) of the OSH Act 2014, the employer is required to continuously improve OSH by applying less hazardous and harmful technologies, work procedures and work substances. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that, pursuant to section 5 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15), the employer shall replace carcinogens and/or mutagens at the workplace with harmless or less harmful substances, compounds or procedures, which, depending on the situation and usage conditions, are not harmful or are less harmful for the workers’ health and safety. In addition, section 6 of the Ordinance provides that employers are required to keep the number of exposed workers to the minimum possible.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the register of incidences of occupational diseases and the CIHPSW’s form for employers to complete on workers who work with carcinogens and mutagens, including the indication that, by the end of 2015, the CIHPSW had received information from 18 employers covering a total of 168 workers exposed to carcinogens and mutagens, with 159 workers having gone through medical examinations prior to work with carcinogens and mutagens, and 164 having gone through periodical medical examinations during the work period. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide details on its appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied in the country, including information regarding inspections carried out and the number and nature of the contraventions reported.

Working Environment (Air Pollution, Noise and Vibration) Convention, 1977 (No. 148)

Article 4(2) of the Convention. Technical standards and codes of practice. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether it has developed or intends to develop any technical standards or codes of practice relating to air pollution, noise or vibration, including the Code of Conduct envisaged under section 13 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Exposure to Noise at Work (No. 46/08).

Article 8(3). Criteria for determining the hazards of exposure to air pollution, noise and vibration and exposure limits. The Committee notes that section 7(1) of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Exposure to Noise at Work (No. 46/08) and section 6(1) of the Ordinance on Protecting Workers from Risks Arising from Exposure to Vibration at Work (No. 155/08) specify that technical progress should be taken into account when reducing risks from noise and vibrations to a minimum. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information regarding the manner in which it is ensured that criteria and exposure limits are revised regularly in the light of current national and international knowledge and data, taking into account as far as possible any increase in occupational hazards resulting from simultaneous exposure to several harmful factors at the workplace, in accordance with Article 8(3) of the Convention.

Article 9. Working environment to be kept free from any hazard due to air pollution, noise or vibration. The Committee notes that, under section 46(1) of the OSH Act 2014, the employer is obliged to continuously improve OSH by applying less hazardous and harmful technologies, work procedures and substances. The Committee also notes the Government’s reference to a number of provisions in national legislation providing for the requirement to eliminate or reduce the risks linked with exposure to noise, vibration, hazardous chemicals, carcinogens or mutagens and asbestos in workplaces, namely: section 47 of the OSH Act 2014; section 7 of the Ordinance on Protection of Workers from Exposure to Noise at Work (No. 46/08); section 6 of the Ordinance on Protecting Workers from Risks Arising from Exposure to Vibration at Work (No. 155/08); section 7 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals at Work (No. 91/15); section 7 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15); and section 7 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on steps taken with respect to technical measures applied to new plant or processes in design or installation, with a view to ensuring that, as far as possible, the working environment is kept free from any hazard due to air pollution, noise or vibration, in accordance with Article 9(a) of the Convention.

Article 11(1). Provision of periodical surveillance of the health of workers exposed or liable to be exposed to occupational hazards due to noise and vibration. The Committee notes the Government’s reference, in response to its previous request concerning the application of Article 11(1), to section 36 of the OSH Act 2014, which sets out requirements for medical check-ups both prior to and during employment involving the performance of work with special working conditions. The Government also refers to section 3(18) of the Ordinance on Special Conditions of Employment (No. 5/84), which includes workers exposed to physical or chemical hazards, noise and vibration in the categories of jobs with special working conditions. The Committee notes that, pursuant to section 103(5) and (6) of the OSH Act 2014, the regulations concerning work with special conditions and requirements to be met by workers performing such work, referred to in section 36(6) of the OSH Act 2014, should have been adopted within 90 days of the entry into force of the OSH Act 2014, and that the Ordinance on Special Conditions of Employment (No. 5/84) shall only be valid until such adoption. The Committee observes that the noise exposure level contemplated by the Ordinance on Special Conditions of Employment (No. 5/84) is higher than the permissible noise levels contemplated in the Annex of the Ordinance on Protection of Workers from Exposure to Noise at Work (No. 46/08). The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether it has taken measures to adopt the regulations envisaged under section 36(6) of the OSH Act 2014.

Article 11(3) and (4). Provision of alternative employment, the right to maintain income, social security benefits or social insurance. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, pursuant to section 40 of the OSH Act 2014, the employer is obliged to carry out special protection measures to prevent further damage to health and impairment of remaining work ability, for workers who have been diagnosed with an occupational disease, and for whom the competent expert body has determined, inter alia, a partial loss of work capacity. Section 40(3) of the OSH Act 2014 requires employers to adapt working conditions and organization of working hours, to remove the risks to safety and health, and to ensure the possibility of other appropriate work or work at a different site if adjustments are not technically feasible or justifiable. The Committee once again recalls that the Convention provides that a transfer to alternative employment is required when continued assignment is considered medically inadvisable, which in certain cases may be before any damage has occurred. The Committee asks the Government to indicate if the special protection measures referred to in section 40 of the OSH Act 2014 also cover the situation in which exposure to air pollution, noise or vibration is found to be medically inadvisable, even in cases where there is no occupational disease. The Committee also requests further information regarding whether measures are taken or envisaged to ensure that the worker concerned is able to maintain his income through other measures if suitable alternative work is not found, in accordance with Article 11(3) of the Convention. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the rights of workers under social security or social insurance legislation are not adversely affected, in accordance with Article 11(4) of the Convention.

Article 12. Notification to the competent authority. The Committee notes the various requirements to provide advance notification for work involving: the production and use of carcinogenic and/or mutagenic substances (section 9(1) of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15)); asbestos (section 5(1) of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07)); and biological agents (section 13 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Biological Agents at Work (No. 155/08)). The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to give full effect to this provision of the Convention in respect of noise and vibration.

Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162)

Articles 3(2) and 15 of the Convention. Periodic review in light of technical progress and advances in scientific knowledge, including review of limits for the exposure of workers to asbestos. The Committee notes that the Government refers in its report to a number of pieces of legislation applying the provisions of this Convention, including the List of Poisons whose Production, Transport and Use is Prohibited (No. 29/05); the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07); the Ordinance on the Method and Procedures for Asbestos Waste Management (No. 42/07); the Act on Mandatory Health Monitoring of Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos (No. 79/07); the Act to Amend and Supplement the Act on the List of Occupational Diseases (No. 107/07); the Ordinance on Conditions and Methods of Health Surveillance and Diagnostic Procedures when Suspecting Asbestos-related Occupational Diseases and the Criteria for Confirmation of Occupational Asbestos-related Disease (No. 134/08); the Act on Compensating Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos (Nos 79/07, 139/10); the Act on the Requirements for Obtaining an Old Age Pension by Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos (Nos 79/07, 149/09 and 139/10); the Ordinance on Limit Values of Exposure to Hazardous Substances at Work and on Biological Limit Values (Nos 13/09, 75/13); the OSH Act 2014; and the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers from Risks related to Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information regarding the manner in which technical progress and advances in scientific knowledge are taken into account in the periodic review of the national legislation regulating asbestos, including the periodic review and update of exposure limits or other exposure criteria for asbestos and the frequency and the procedures for such reviews.

Articles 5(2) and 10(b). Prohibition of the use of asbestos and appropriate penalties. The Government refers to the ban on the production, trade and usage of asbestos and asbestos containing materials in Croatia, which entered into force on 1 January 2006, and includes crocidolite. The Committee observes that the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07) includes crocidolite in the definition of asbestos. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15) also applies the provisions of this Convention. The Committee notes that section 5 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15) requires the employer to replace carcinogenic and/or mutagenic substances with harmless or less dangerous substances or preparations. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the national laws or regulations provide for the necessary measures, including appropriate penalties, to ensure effective enforcement of and compliance with the provisions of this Convention. It also requests the Government to provide information regarding the implementation of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Carcinogens and/or Mutagens (No. 91/15) in relation to asbestos and asbestos-containing products.

Article 17(1). Demolition and removal work. The Committee notes that section 16 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07) refers to regulations defining the conditions for demolition of buildings and maintenance work involving asbestos. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the measures taken to give effect to this provision of the Convention, including the regulations referred to in section 16 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07).

Article 19(1). Disposal of waste containing asbestos. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide further information on the application throughout the country of legislative measures requiring all work related to remediation to be carried out under expert supervision by an authorized company. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the procedures in place to handle and dispose of asbestos-containing waste. It notes the Ordinance on the Method and Procedures for Asbestos Waste Management (No. 42/07), which sets out measures for the prevention and reduction of asbestos contamination, and requires in section 7(3) that the work plan for the removal of asbestos or asbestos containing materials regulate, in particular, measures necessary for the protection of OSH of the workers and the obligation to use special protective equipment in line with special regulations on OSH. According to the information provided by the Government, the Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund concludes contracts for the construction of special cells, at landfills, designated for the disposal of waste containing asbestos. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has constructed 17 special cells for the disposal of asbestos in 13 counties. The Government provides a list of collectors with a contract with the Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund, regarding the collection, transportation, temporary storage, and delivery for disposal of construction waste containing asbestos in a specially constructed cell at the municipal waste landfill. The Committee notes that the document provided by the Government, dating from 2013 and entitled “Instruction on Handling Asbestos Containing Construction Waste Intended for Disposal on Specially Constructed Cells on Landfills for Non-Hazardous Waste”, requires the preparation of construction waste containing asbestos for the certified collectors.

Article 20(4). Right of workers or their representatives to request monitoring and appeal to the competent authorities. The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the manner in which effect has been given to Article 20(4) of the Convention.

Article 21(4). Means of maintaining workers’ income. The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that, when continued assignment to work involving exposure to asbestos is found to be medically inadvisable, every effort shall be made, consistent with national conditions and practice, to provide the workers concerned with other means of maintaining their income, in accordance with Article 21(4) of the Convention.

Article 21(5). System of notification of occupational diseases caused by asbestos. The Committee notes the indication by the Government that the CIHPSW gathers data on persons with asbestos-related health problems into their register and that this data is published annually online. Section 21(2) of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07) also refers to the requirement to notify established cases of asbestosis and mesothelioma in accordance with special regulations. The Government further notes that there is an extensive follow-up programme of workers exposed to asbestos, and preventive health monitoring programmes are in place for the surveillance of the health status of workers exposed to asbestos every three years, until 30 years after the last exposure. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the notification procedures for asbestos-related occupational diseases to the CIHPSW as well as the regulations referred to in section 21(2) of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07).

Article 22(2) and (3). Written policies and procedures for the education and periodic training of workers on hazards due to asbestos. Information about health hazards related to the work, instructions in preventive measures and correct work practices and continuing training in these fields. The Committee notes that section 18 of the Ordinance on the Protection of Workers against the Risk of Exposure to Asbestos (No. 40/07) requires information on health hazards to be provided by the employer to workers and their representatives. Section 15(2) of the Ordinance further provides that workers’ training programmes must enable workers to acquire skills and knowledge in relation to asbestos, including protective measures and the effects of asbestos on health. The Government also indicates that the employer must take measures to ensure that: workers and/or their representatives have access to the results of measurements of concentration of asbestos fibres in the working environment and are given interpretation of these results; and that workers and/or their representatives are informed as soon as possible about exceeding the maximum limit concentrations, and are consulted on the measures to be taken in an emergency, as well as informed of the measures which have been taken. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information regarding the training provided to workers on asbestos hazards and methods of prevention and control.

Underground Work (Women) Convention, 1935 (No. 45)

The Committee recalls that the ILO Governing Body (at its 334th Session, October–November 2018), on the recommendation of the Standards Review Mechanism (SRM) Tripartite Working Group, classified Convention No. 45 as an outdated instrument, and has placed an item on the agenda of the 113th Session of the International Labour Conference (2024) concerning its abrogation. The Governing Body also requested the Office to follow-up with member States currently bound by Convention No. 45 to encourage the ratification of up-to-date instruments concerning OSH, including but not limited to the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176), and to undertake a campaign to promote the ratification of Convention No. 176.

The Committee therefore encourages the Government to follow up the Governing Body’s decision at its 334th Session (October–November 2018) approving the recommendations of the SRM Tripartite Working Group and to consider ratifying the most up-to-date instruments in this subject area.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on occupational safety and health (OSH), the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 155 (OSH), 161 (occupational health services) and 162 (asbestos) together.

The Committee notes the observations of the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia (UATUC) and the Independent Trade Unions of Croatia (NHS), received in 2016.

A. General provisions

Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155)

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the information in the registry of the Croatian Institute for Health Protection and Safety at Work (CIHPSW) for 2017, and notes with concern that the total number of recorded cases of occupational diseases increased between 2016 and 2017, from 153 in 2016 to 172 in 2017. It also notes the information that, according to the Annual Report in 2017 of the labour inspectorate, there were 22 fatalities at work in 2017. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the manner in which the Convention is applied, and to continue to provide the number, nature and cause of occupational accidents and cases of occupational disease reported.

Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161)

Articles 5(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (g), (h), (i) and (k) and 6 of the Convention. Establishment and functions of occupational health services. The Committee notes the repeal of the former Occupational Safety and Health Act by the OSH Act 2014, and recalls that sections 22 and 82 of the repealed legislation gave effect to Article 5 of the Convention. The Committee notes that section 80 of the OSH Act 2014 requires the employer to provide employees with occupational medical services so as to ensure health surveillance appropriate to risks, hazards and exertions during work with a view to protecting the health of employees. Section 81 of the OSH Act 2014 further provides that occupational medicine activities, as well as the plan and programme of health protection measures, shall be prescribed by special regulations on health protection and health insurance, and that the minimum hours that the occupational medicine specialist is required to be present at the workplace shall be stipulated in an Ordinance. In this respect, the Committee notes the observations of the UATUC and the NHS, stating that, as of 2016, the Ministry of Health had not adopted regulations prescribing elements such as the minimum hours the occupational medicine specialist has to spend at the workplace, or the procedures for administering first aid. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the occupational medicine specialist’s participation in risk assessments at the workplace is not prescribed by national legislation, and that experience indicates that the employer rarely consults occupational medicine specialists during such assessments in practice, even though Article 5(a) of the Convention prescribes that the functions of occupational health services shall include the identification and assessment of the risks from health hazards in the workplace. In addition, section 20 of the Health Care Act (as amended) sets out types of healthcare that fall within the category of specific healthcare for workers, but provides that the content of measures on specific healthcare of workers and the method for implementing them shall be laid down by the Minister of Health in an Ordinance at the proposal of the CIHPSW, subject to prior approval by the Minister of Labour and the Pension System. The UATUC and NHS indicate, however, that these measures have not been prescribed. Noting that the OSH Act 2014 does not directly give effect to the majority of the provisions of Article 5 and requires the adoption of special regulations that have yet to be adopted, the Committee urges the Government to provide the information on the measures taken to give full effect to Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention. The Committee further requests the Government to indicate whether measures have been taken to adopt special regulations concerning occupational health activities and the plan and programme of health protection measures, as envisaged by section 81 of the OSH Act 2014, as well as the Ordinances referred to in section 20 of the Health Care Act. The Committee requests the Government to provide the list of such regulations where they have been adopted.

B. Protection from specific risks

Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162)

Effective compensation of workers of the Salonit factory. In its previous comments, the Committee requested information regarding the application in practice of the Law on compensation of workers employed with Salonit d.d. (No. 84/11), pursuant to which workers employed in the Salonit factory (which manufactured asbestos products) when it declared bankruptcy in 2006 could apply for compensation within 60 days (section 2). In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the payment to the workers of compensation due to job loss was planned in instalments over two years in 2011 and 2012. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that all requests for compensation have been resolved, with all 170 workers from the Salonit factory being compensated where they were eligible for compensation and had submitted a request to the Fund for Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government regarding the establishment of an Ad-hoc Commission for Complaints to deal with appeals against the decisions taken by the Fund, consisting of representatives from the Ministry for Environmental Protection, Physical Planning and Construction, Ministry of Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Justice and Fund for Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any developments regarding this issue, including the number of appeals launched, and on the decisions taken by the Ad-hoc Commission for Complaints.

The Commission for Settling Claims for Compensation by Workers Suffering from Occupational Diseases Due to Exposure to Asbestos (the Commission). The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that, since the establishment of the Commission in 2007 until mid-2016, 1,318 claims had been resolved (1,072 resulting in compensation), 22 were pending before the courts, and 245 were yet to be resolved. The Committee notes the observations by the UATUC and the NHS, which provide different statistics regarding resolved and unresolved claims for compensation. The Committee also notes an absence of information regarding measures taken to raise the awareness of workers regarding possibilities for seeking redress. The Committee requests the Government to continue to ensure that all claims and requests for compensation by workers suffering from an occupational disease due to exposure to asbestos during the course of their employment are handled as expeditiously as possible. It requests the Government to provide information on progress in this respect, as well as on the measures taken to raise the awareness of such workers regarding the possibilities for seeking redress.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the registry of the CIHPSW on asbestos-induced occupational diseases, which are published annually online and includes up-to-date data and statistics on asbestos-induced diseases, broken down by geographical distribution, types of disease, gender, age, types of education and training and other metrics. The Committee notes that, according to the data of the CIHPSW, 89 cases of asbestos-induced occupational illnesses were registered in 2017, of which 79 (88.8 per cent) were men and ten (11.2 per cent) were women. In addition, the Committee notes that, according to the data of the CIHPSW, the percentage of occupational diseases caused by exposure to asbestos in 2017 was 52 per cent (89 out of 172 recorded cases). Noting the percentage, which remains high, of occupational diseases caused by asbestos, the Committee urges the Government to strengthen its efforts to ensure the medical surveillance in practice of workers that are or have been exposed to asbestos. The Committee further requests the Government to continue to provide information regarding the application of this Convention in practice, including any measures taken at the institutional level in the application of the Convention. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding the application in practice of the prohibition on the usage of asbestos and asbestos-containing materials in Croatia, which entered into force on 1 January 2006.

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

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its latest report, but notes that the Government has not submitted a detailed report, as requested by the Committee, indicating the specific measures which give effect to each Article of the Convention. The Committee therefore reiterates its request to the Government to submit a detailed report, indicating the measures taken or envisaged, in law and in practice, to give effect to each Article of the Convention, in order to allow the Committee to properly examine the current application of the Convention in the country.

Effective compensation of workers of the Salonit factory. The Committee previously noted the comments submitted by the Croatian Trade Union Association (HUS) in 2009 alleging that the workers of the Salonit factory had not been compensated, and that they had had significant problems in defining their working status as the ex-owner still controlled the bankruptcy process. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on whether it had succeeded in mitigating the negative impact on the individual workers concerned and on the legal stalemate caused by the bankruptcy process against the ex-owner of the Salonit factory. In this regard, the Committee notes the adoption of the “Law on compensation of workers employed with Salonit d.d. which is under bankruptcy procedure” (Law No. 84/11), which provides for the compensation of workers of the factory, whether or not they suffer from any disease caused by asbestos. The Committee notes that section 2 of Law No. 84/11 provides that workers employed in the Salonit factory when it declared bankruptcy in 2006 may apply for compensation within 60 days from the date of entry into force of the Law. Moreover, section 3 provides that such workers will receive compensation amounting to 219,000 Croatian kunas (HRK) over a period of two years. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of Law No. 84/11 in practice, particularly the number of workers who have applied for compensation under this Law, as well as the number who have received compensation to date.

General compensation: the Commission for Settling Claims for Compensation by Workers Suffering from Occupational Diseases Due to Exposure to Asbestos (the Commission). The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the Commission has received 1,230 claims since its establishment in 2007, pursuant to the Act on compensating workers occupationally exposed to asbestos. Of these claims, 492 have been completely resolved, 86 are in the courts, and 652 have yet to be resolved. The Government indicates that the average compensation per claim is approximately HRK85,000. The Committee requests the Government to continue to ensure that all claims and requests for compensation by workers suffering from an occupational disease due to exposure to asbestos during the course of their employment are handled as expeditiously as possible. It requests the Government to provide information on progress in this respect, as well as on the measures taken to raise the awareness of such workers regarding the possibilities for seeking redress.

Measures taken at the institutional level. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Croatian Institute for Health Protection and Safety at Work is legally obligated to keep a register of occupational diseases caused by asbestos, and that this is published each year on the Institute’s website. It also welcomes the register of occupational diseases and the statistical analysis thereof submitted with the Government’s report. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the activities undertaken by the Croatian Institute for Health Protection and Safety at Work, in particular concerning the application of the Convention. Moreover, recalling the adoption of the National Occupational Health and Safety Programme 2009–13, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken within the framework of this programme related to the application of this Convention.

Article 19 of the Convention. Disposal of waste containing asbestos. The Committee previously noted that the remediation of asbestos cement waste was being undertaken in several locations in the country. It noted the requirement for all work related to remediation to be carried out under expert supervision by an authorized company, and that the Government had published a list of the companies holding a waste management license that are authorized to collect, transport and dispose of waste that contains asbestos. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide further information on the application throughout the country of legislative measures requiring all work related to remediation to be carried out under expert supervision by an authorized company.

Decisions by courts of law and application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that there is a trend for the total number of occupational diseases to rise due to the growing number of occupational diseases caused by exposure to asbestos at the workplace. The Government indicates that occupational diseases caused by exposure to asbestos constitute 89 per cent of the total number of occupational diseases recorded (435 out of the 488 recorded cases in 2011). The Government indicates in this regard that it has undertaken a detailed analysis of the occupational diseases caused by asbestos, including the geographical distribution of the reported cases. The Committee asks the Government to give a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied in the country, and to continue to provide, where such statistics exist, information on the number of workers covered by the legislation, the number and nature of the contraventions reported, and the number, nature and cause of occupational accidents and diseases reported. In addition, noting the Government’s indication that 86 claims to the Commission for Settling Claims for Compensation by Workers Suffering from Occupational Diseases Due to Exposure to Asbestos are before the courts, the Committee asks the Government to provide further information on the outcomes of these lawsuits, and to provide copies of the texts of the decisions.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its latest report, but notes that the Government has not submitted a detailed report, as requested by the Committee, indicating the specific measures which give effect to each Article of the Convention. The Committee therefore reiterates its request to the Government to submit a detailed report, indicating the measures taken or envisaged, in law and in practice, to give effect to each Article of the Convention, in order to allow the Committee to properly examine the current application of the Convention in the country.

Effective compensation of workers of the Salonit factory. The Committee previously noted the comments submitted by the Croatian Trade Union Association (HUS) in 2009 alleging that the workers of the Salonit factory had not been compensated, and that they had had significant problems in defining their working status as the ex-owner still controlled the bankruptcy process. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on whether it had succeeded in mitigating the negative impact on the individual workers concerned and on the legal stalemate caused by the bankruptcy process against the ex-owner of the Salonit factory. In this regard, the Committee notes the adoption of the “Law on compensation of workers employed with Salonit d.d. which is under bankruptcy procedure” (Law No. 84/11), which provides for the compensation of workers of the factory, whether or not they suffer from any disease caused by asbestos. The Committee notes that section 2 of Law No. 84/11 provides that workers employed in the Salonit factory when it declared bankruptcy in 2006 may apply for compensation within 60 days from the date of entry into force of the Law. Moreover, section 3 provides that such workers will receive compensation amounting to 219,000 Croatian kunas (HRK) over a period of two years. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of Law No. 84/11 in practice, particularly the number of workers who have applied for compensation under this Law, as well as the number who have received compensation to date.

General compensation: the Commission for Settling Claims for Compensation by Workers Suffering from Occupational Diseases Due to Exposure to Asbestos (the Commission). The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the Commission has received 1,230 claims since its establishment in 2007, pursuant to the Act on compensating workers occupationally exposed to asbestos. Of these claims, 492 have been completely resolved, 86 are in the courts, and 652 have yet to be resolved. The Government indicates that the average compensation per claim is approximately HRK85,000. The Committee requests the Government to continue to ensure that all claims and requests for compensation by workers suffering from an occupational disease due to exposure to asbestos during the course of their employment are handled as expeditiously as possible. It requests the Government to provide information on progress in this respect, as well as on the measures taken to raise the awareness of such workers regarding the possibilities for seeking redress.

Measures taken at the institutional level. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Croatian Institute for Health Protection and Safety at Work is legally obligated to keep a register of occupational diseases caused by asbestos, and that this is published each year on the Institute’s website. It also welcomes the register of occupational diseases and the statistical analysis thereof submitted with the Government’s report. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the activities undertaken by the Croatian Institute for Health Protection and Safety at Work, in particular concerning the application of the Convention. Moreover, recalling the adoption of the National Occupational Health and Safety Programme 2009–13, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken within the framework of this programme related to the application of this Convention.

Article 19 of the Convention. Disposal of waste containing asbestos. The Committee previously noted that the remediation of asbestos cement waste was being undertaken in several locations in the country. It noted the requirement for all work related to remediation to be carried out under expert supervision by an authorized company, and that the Government had published a list of the companies holding a waste management license that are authorized to collect, transport and dispose of waste that contains asbestos. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide further information on the application throughout the country of legislative measures requiring all work related to remediation to be carried out under expert supervision by an authorized company.

Parts III and V of the report form. Decisions by courts of law and application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that there is a trend for the total number of occupational diseases to rise due to the growing number of occupational diseases caused by exposure to asbestos at the workplace. The Government indicates that occupational diseases caused by exposure to asbestos constitute 89 per cent of the total number of occupational diseases recorded (435 out of the 488 recorded cases in 2011). The Government indicates in this regard that it has undertaken a detailed analysis of the occupational diseases caused by asbestos, including the geographical distribution of the reported cases. The Committee asks the Government to give a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied in the country, and to continue to provide, where such statistics exist, information on the number of workers covered by the legislation, the number and nature of the contraventions reported, and the number, nature and cause of occupational accidents and diseases reported. In addition, noting the Government’s indication that 86 claims to the Commission for Settling Claims for Compensation by Workers Suffering from Occupational Diseases Due to Exposure to Asbestos are before the courts, the Committee asks the Government to provide further information on the outcomes of these lawsuits, and to provide copies of the texts of the decisions.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its latest report. The Committee notes, however, that the Government has not submitted a detailed report, as requested, indicating the specific measures which give effect to each Article of the Convention, in order to allow the Committee to properly examine the current application of the Convention in the country. The Committee therefore reiterates its request to the Government to submit a detailed report, indicating the measures taken or envisaged, in law and in practice, to give effect to each Article of the Convention, and to continue to provide information on any legislative measures undertaken with regard to the Convention.

The Committee also recalls the comments submitted by the Croatian Trade Union Association (HUS) in 2009 regarding the Salonit asbestos issue referred to briefly in its previous comment, and that the HUS alleges that there has been no change in solving the workers’ status, that the workers have still not been compensated, and that they still have major problems in defining their working status as the ex-owner still controls the bankruptcy process. The Committee also notes the information submitted by HUS that around ten workers started a hunger strike in September 2009 in order to call upon an urgent solution to their problems. While the Committee notes the response provided by the Government on the issues examined below, the Committee notes the absence of further information regarding, inter alia, the legal stalemate caused by the bankruptcy process against the ex-owner of the Salonit factory. The Government is requested to provide further information in response to this and other issues raised by the HUS including in particular, whether the Government has succeeded in adequately mitigating the negative impact of this legislative stalemate for the individual workers concerned.

With reference to its previous comments concerning legislative measures taken and the question of compensation of victims and providing them an old-age pension on more favourable conditions, the Committee notes with satisfaction the information provided by the Government regarding the adoption of the Ordinance on conditions and methods for health monitoring, diagnostic procedures for suspected occupational diseases caused by asbestos and the criteria for recognizing occupational diseases cause by asbestos (Official Gazette 134/08). The Committee also notes that the Commission for Settling Claims for Compensation by Workers Suffering from Occupational Diseases Due to Exposure to Asbestos (the Commission) drew up guidelines in 2010 for workers claiming compensation, pursuant to the Act on compensating workers occupationally exposed to asbestos, which provide a detailed explanation of the procedure for recognizing occupational diseases and indicate the documents that need to be submitted in order to obtain the right to monetary compensation for an occupational disease caused by exposure to asbestos. The Government indicates that these guidelines, accompanied by application forms and other useful information, have been made available on the website of the Croatian Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. The Committee notes the information indicating that the Commission has received 937 claims for compensation since it was established in 2007, including 106 new cases between July 2009 and July 2010. The Government indicates that of the 330 decisions that have been issued, 144 were successful and 186 were unsuccessful. The Committee further notes the information indicating that in the course of implementing the Act on the requirements for obtaining an old-age pension by workers occupationally exposed to asbestos (Official Gazette 79/07), it was noted that there were a certain number of workers, who, while working for a legal person using asbestos as a raw material in its manufacturing process (Salonit d.d. in administration and Plobest), had subsequently developed a recognized asbestos-related occupational disease, but did not meet the requirements relating to age or had not completed the required number of years of insurance, as prescribed by the Act. The Committee welcomes the information indicating that in response to this, the Government amended the Act (Official Gazette 149/09) in order to enable this category of ill workers to obtain the right to an old-age pension under more favourable conditions. As a result of this, since 1 January 2010, they have been receiving 26 per cent higher pensions. The Committee asks the Government to continue to ensure that all claims and requests for compensation by workers suffering from an occupational disease due to exposure to asbestos during the course of their employment are handled as expeditiously as possible, to provide information on progress in this respect, as well as on the measures taken to raise the awareness of such workers regarding the possibilities to seek redress.

As regards measures taken at the institutional level, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report on the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), concerning the adoption on 19 December 2008 of the National Occupational Health and Safety Programme 2009–13, and the establishment, after consultation with the social partners, of the Croatian Institute for Health Protection and Safety at Work. The Government indicates that the Institute has the role of confirming diagnosed occupational diseases and keeping a register of occupational diseases, as well as submitting an annual report to the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare on the preventive measures taken to reduce the number and occurrence of occupational diseases, accidents and any other injuries to health which arise in the course of or in connection with work. The Committee also notes that the Institute is establishing a database on the employers and workers who handle, or are exposed to, antineoplastic, carcinogenic and mutagenic substances and ionizing radiations, and that employers are legally obliged to submit data to the Institute. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the activities undertaken by the Croatian Institute for Health Protection and Safety at Work, in particular concerning the application of the Convention; and to provide an update on the previously noted intention to ensure coherent national action in relation to the application of this Convention.

As regards measures taken to rehabilitate the Salonit factory and adjacent areas, the Committee notes the information indicating that the Government, through the Fund for Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency, paid 86 million kuna (HRK) for labour costs of workers, and that until the end of 2009, contracts worth HRK13 million had been concluded for preparing rehabilitation work, with the involvement of 107 workers of the Salonit d.d. administration. The Government further indicates that the Fund guarantees continued engagement in rehabilitation work to all workers who do not acquire the right to pension. The Committee notes, however, that the Government has not addressed the application throughout the country of legislative measures requiring that all work related to remediation be carried out under expert supervision by an authorized company. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the application throughout the country of legislative measures requiring that all work related to remediation be carried out under expert supervision by an authorized company.

Part III of the report form. Decisions by courts of law. The Committee notes the information which indicates that a total of 29 lawsuits were filed with the Administrative Court by the applicants who had been unsuccessful in their application for compensation. The Committee asks the Government to provide further information on the outcomes of these lawsuits, and to provide copies of the texts of the decisions.

Part V of the report form. Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee asks the Government to give a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied in the country, and to provide, where such statistics exist, information on the number of workers covered by the legislation, the number and nature of the contraventions reported, and the number, nature and cause of occupational accidents and diseases reported.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2012.]

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

The Committee notes the observations submitted by the Croatian Association of Unions (HUS) submitted on 18 September 2009 and transmitted to the Government on 2 October 2009 for comments. The Committee notes that the HUS alleges that there has been no change in solving the workers status, that the workers have still not been compensated and that they still have major problems in defining their working status as the ex-owner still controls the bankruptcy process. The Committee also notes the information submitted by the HUS that around ten workers decided to start a hunger strike in September 2009 in order to call attention to an urgent solution to their problems. The Committee refers to its previous observation, in which it requested the Government to report in detail in 2010 and the Committee requested the Government, to take, inter alia, action as follows:

… [The Committee] urges the Government to adopt all relevant implementing legislation, take all relevant measures to ensure that the legislative measures taken are effectively implemented and to pursue its efforts to raise awareness among all workers occupationally exposed to asbestos regarding the possibilities to seek redress and to facilitate the procedures for those who wish to do so by filing claims for compensation. …

… [The Committee] urges the Government to take all measures necessary to minimize the delays incurred for those entitled to compensation and to old age pension, to ensure that all claims and requests are handled as expeditiously as possible. …

In the light of the foregoing, and in the context of the detailed report requested for 2010 on the follow-up to its 2008 comment, the Committee requests the Government to respond in detail to the abovementioned observations submitted by the HUS and yet again urges the Government to take all necessary action to ensure a complete and timely follow-up to the conclusions of the High-level Direct Contacts Mission in 2007, to the Committee’s 2008 comments and to ensure full application of the Convention in the country.

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

With reference to its previous comments, the conclusions of the ILO high-level direct contacts mission to Croatia from 2 to 6 April 2007 (the mission), and the discussions in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards, most recently in June 2008, the Committee notes the detailed information submitted by the Government in its reports of March 2008 concerning measures taken since the mission, and of November 2008 concerning the legislative, judicial, institutional and environmental protection measures taken by it to follow up on the conclusions of the mission and of the Conference discussion in 2008, to improve the application of the Convention in the country and to adopt a more holistic approach to occupational safety and health in the country.

As regards legislative measures taken, the Committee notes with satisfaction that as a follow-up to the conclusions of the mission, the following legislation has been adopted:

–           Act on Mandatory Health Monitoring of Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos.

–           Act on Amendments to the List of Occupational Diseases Act.

–           Act on Requirements for Obtaining an Old-Age Pension by Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos.

–           Act on Compensating Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos.

–           Act on Amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

–           Act on Amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Insurance Act.

–           Act on Amendments to the Health-Care Act.

The Committee also notes that the Government indicates that implementing legislation to the Act on Mandatory Health Monitoring of Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos, including diagnostic procedures and criteria for establishing a list of occupational diseases caused by asbestos, has been drafted and is due to be published in the Official Gazette shortly. The Committee also notes, with interest, the measures taken to raise awareness concerning the Act on Compensating Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos and to facilitate the filing and handling of claims for compensation through, inter alia, occupational medicine specialists and outreach activities to the trade unions and associations of persons suffering from asbestos-related diseases (ARDs) such as the “Asbestos beagles” from Vranjic and “Victims of Asbestos” from Plǒce. The Committee notes that the Government now has enacted the legislative programme it undertook to carry out at the conclusion of the mission and that it has created the necessary legal basis for complying with the Convention. It urges, however, the Government to adopt all relevant implementing legislation, take all relevant action to ensure that the legislative measures taken are effectively implemented and to pursue its efforts to raise awareness among all workers occupationally exposed to asbestos regarding the possibilities to seek redress and to facilitate the procedures for those who wish to do so by filing claims for compensation. It requests the Government to submit copies of all relevant new legislation and to report on progress made in this respect.

With respect to the question of effective compensation of victims and providing them with old-age pension on more favourable conditions, the Committee notes the detailed information regarding the work of the Commission for Settling Claims for Compensation by Workers Suffering from Occupational Diseases Due to Exposure to Asbestos, the body responsible for handling claims for compensation. It notes that, until November 2008, 26 claims for a total of 2,115,336 Croatian Kunas have been awarded. The Committee further notes the information that the Commission cooperates with national courts to identify the large number of workers suffering from ARDs that already have been awarded claims for compensation but who have been unable, wholly or partially, to collect damages from the employer for whom they worked when they were exposed to asbestos and that information is also sought from the relevant enterprises. The Committee also notes the information regarding the claims for old-age pension and that until November 2008, 79 out of 135 workers of Salonit Vranjic had met the requirements for obtaining old-age pension pursuant to the Act on Requirements for Obtaining an Old-Age Pension by Workers Occupationally Exposed to Asbestos and that 21 had actually started to receive this pension. It also notes the information that, out of the 468 former workers from Plobest, in Plǒce, who had not yet received old-age pensions, only 40 workers had filed claims for old-age pensions pursuant to the Act and that 27 had been awarded a pension. While noting that some progress has been made in the processing of claims and the award of old-age pensions, the Committee urges the Government to take all measures necessary to minimize the delays incurred for those entitled to compensation and to old-age pension, to ensure that all claims and requests are handled as expeditiously as possible and to report on progress made in this respect.

At regards measures taken at the institutional level the Committee notes that, in addition to setting up the Commission for Settling Claims for Compensation by Workers Suffering from Occupational Diseases Due to Exposure to Asbestos, the legislative amendments in 2008 to the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Occupational Health and Safety Insurance Act and the Health-Care Act referred to above, were enacted to create the basis for the setting up as of 1 January 2009 of the Croatian Institute for Health and Safety at Work to replace the Croatian Institute for Occupational Medicine. The Committee notes that this new institution will be staffed with 55 experts including occupational medicine specialists, psychologists, toxicologists and occupational health and safety specialists and will be responsible for preventive activities, statistical research, education and promotion of occupational health and safety, on the basis of a multidisciplinary approach. The Committee notes with interest that this new institution is intended to provide administrative and professional support not only in the normative area, but also towards building capacities for prevention, counselling and research and that it is to assist and cooperate with the tripartite National Council for Occupational Health and Safety to resolve various issues connected with the protection of health and safety at work. The Committee welcomes these developments and requests the Government to provide further information on the actual activities of the new institution once it has become operational and to provide further details regarding the institutional cooperation between the National Council for Occupational Health and Safety and the Croatian Institute for Health and Safety at Work.

As regards measures taken to rehabilitate the Salonit factory and adjacent areas, the Committee notes the adoption of a Waste Management Plan 2007–15, the Transport of Hazardous Substances Act, the Ordinance on the Methods and Procedures for the Management of Asbestos containing Waste and the Decision on Action to be Undertaken by the Fund for Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency to implement emergency measures aimed at setting up a system for collecting and managing asbestos containing waste. It also notes the detailed information concerning the completion of the remediation of asbestos cement waste and of the facilities of the Salonit Vranjic factory and at the Mravinacka Kava landfill in September 2007 and, most recently, of the football field adjacent to the Salonit Vranjic factory. The Committee notes the requirements that all work related to remediation has been carried out under expert supervision by an authorized company. The Committee also notes that the recent decision enables the competent ministry to respond to the numerous inquiries regarding the manner and location for the disposal of asbestos containing waste and that it has published a list of the companies holding a waste management licence and that are authorized to collect, transport and dispose of waste that contains asbestos, giving effect to Article 19 of the Convention. While welcoming these developments, it urges the Government to ensure that the new legislative measures adopted will be applied throughout the country and asks the Government to report on progress in this respect.

With reference to the conclusions of the Conference Committee regarding the fragmented approach taken to the general application of the Convention, the Committee notes the information that a National Programme for Occupational Health and Safety is being prepared by the National Council for Occupational Health and Safety and is to be adopted before the end of 2008. It notes that, through this National Programme, the Government intends to define a national occupational health and safety policy, allocate funds for resolving certain OSH issues, and to provide for further implementing OSH regulations to the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The Committee notes that the proposed National Programme will specify areas for targeted action and that action is to be governed by the following strategic principles: partnership and cooperation of all the stakeholders; the prevention of risks; sustainable development and reasonableness used to minimize risks. The basic goals of the Programme are to reduce the number of occupational accidents, the number of occupational diseases and work-related diseases and to prevent and reduce economic losses due to occupational accidents and diseases. The Committee welcomes this approach and hopes that, once it has become operational and effectively implemented, the National Programme will contribute to a more holistic approach to OSH in the country and constitute a framework for national OSH legislation, including the legislation relevant for the application of the present Convention. The Committee asks the Government to report on progress made in this respect, and to pay particular attention to the need for coherent national action in the general application of the Convention.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2010.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

1. The Committee recalls the grave concerns it expressed in its observation in 2005 regarding the application of the Convention in Croatia and, in particular, the situation at the Salonit-Vranjic factory site. It also recalls the discussion that took place at the Conference Committee in June 2006 and that the Conference Committee, in its conclusions, invited the Government to accept, as a matter of urgency, a high-level direct contacts mission with a view to verifying the situation “in situ” and to follow up on this case. The Committee notes that the Government accepted this invitation.

2. The Committee is in receipt of the report of the high-level direct contacts mission (the mission) undertaken by the Office from 2 to 6 April 2007 in Croatia as a follow-up to the conclusions of the Conference Committee in June 2006. It notes that the purpose of the mission was to review the national situation regarding activities involving exposure of workers to asbestos in the course of work; to seek information regarding past and present exposure of workers to asbestos at the Salonit-Vranjic factory site and on past and present pollution of the general environment by asbestos released therefrom; and to review the measures taken and envisaged in both law and practice for an effective application of the Convention including, in particular, the measures taken to consult with the social partners on such measures.

3. In addition to the reports submitted by the Government in 2006 and the communications submitted by the Association of the Workers Affected by Asbestosis, Vranjic (the Association), the Committee has examined the report of the mission, the numerous written documents and other material made available to the mission by the Government and government officials, organizations representing workers occupationally exposed to asbestos, in particular at the Salonit-Vranjic factory and the Association, as well as the conclusions of the mission.

4. The Committee welcomes the fact that the mission could be efficiently carried out in full cooperation with the Government and all relevant line ministries, in particular the Ministry of Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship (MELE) and the social partners, and that arrangements were made to facilitate the meetings between the members of the mission and other relevant stakeholders including, in particular, workers occupationally exposed to asbestos, inter alia, at the Salonit-Vranjic factory site.

5. The Committee notes that, according to statements made in the context of the mission, the Government’s ambition is to ensure the full application of Convention No. 162, as well as to align Croatia’s legislation with the requirements of the acquis communautaire. The Government recognizes that there is a need to review the provisions on health protection, employment and social protection, and to build institutional and other capacities to be able to do so. The Government also shares the view that it is urgent to find a solution to the problems of the Salonit-Vranjic workers, in particular with regard to pension rights and the resolution of their claims for compensation, including a mechanism to provide funds for the settlement of those claims, as Salonit-Vranjic has gone bankrupt, and that the claims of the workers at the factory would have to be paid from the state budget, as Salonit-Vranjic had formerly been a state-owned company. The Committee also notes the Government’s statement that, while its aim is to obtain the best possible pensions for all the workers and not only those suffering from asbestos-related diseases, any such solutions depend on clearance from the Ministry of Finance. Against this background, the Committee particularly welcomes MELE’s undertaking at the conclusion of the mission, to consider whether current financial decisions could be reconsidered so as to make financial provision for the resolution of these issues, and that MELE invited the other ministries concerned to do the same. The Committee also welcomes the undertaking by MELE to give further consideration to a possible partial solution to this urgent and serious problem.

6. The Committee deeply regrets, however, that it is not in a position to verify whether these intentions have been translated into concrete action and to carry out a detailed examination of the issues raised in its 2005 observation as the Government has not, as requested, submitted any report to the ILO on the action taken by it since the mission. Against this background, the Committee strongly urges the Government to make immediate efforts to take the actions and measures detailed in the conclusions of the mission, and to give top priority to resolving the cases of workers suffering from asbestosis and other related diseases. It is imperative to allocate the necessary personnel and financial resources so that the various measures can be effectively implemented. The conclusions of the mission, in their relevant parts, are reproduced below.

Legislative provisions pending

The mission was informed that the following legislative provisions concerning the diagnostic, medical care and reimbursement claims of those suffering from diseases caused by asbestos were pending and had not yet been submitted to the Croatian ECOSOC and Parliament:

(a)    Draft Law on mandatory health-care oversight of workers professionally exposed to asbestos. This draft legislation proposes a methodology for follow-up on the medical status of workers exposed to asbestos, a board for follow-up of these cases and another board responsible for the implementation of the diagnostic procedure.

(b)    Draft Rules on health-care oversight of workers professionally exposed to asbestos and the diagnostic criteria for determining a list of professional diseases caused by asbestos (important issue of concern: the criteria used for diagnosis).

(c)    Draft Law on reimbursement of the insurance claims of workers professionally exposed to asbestos. This draft Law will regulate the recognition of claims by workers for diseases caused by asbestos, the procedure to be followed and the body responsible for administering claims. The draft Law will also provide for an alternative dispute settlement mechanism that will be more expeditious and will allow for out-of-court settlement in respect of claims filed by workers occupationally exposed to asbestos.

(d)    Draft Law on conditions for acquiring the right to an old-age pension for employees who are professionally exposed to asbestos. This draft sets out special conditions for acquiring an old age pension in the case of workers who have been exposed to or who have became ill from asbestos and whose employment has been terminated due to redundancies or as a result of the closure of the business due to the ban on asbestos.

(e)    Draft Regulation on the manner and procedures for managing waste containing asbestos.

Legislative measures

The mission was informed that the above five proposed legislative measures were pending due to budgetary constraints or were awaiting budgetary analysis. The mission noted that the legislative approach taken is fragmented, instead of being a single integrated legislative framework. This might make it difficult for the workers concerned to know and understand each of these legislative texts. However, the mission was aware that these various texts have been under discussion for some time. The mission proposed that the legislative texts should include provisions on sanctions to enhance enforcement and should also contain expedited and affordable appeal procedures.

The mission considered that the various legislative measures were long overdue and that it was now urgent to take them forward based on tripartite consultation and that they should be submitted to Parliament without delay. Failure to implement these measures would fall short of full compliance with Convention No. 162 by Croatia and leave unprotected the workers who have been exposed to asbestos, many of whom have already died, are dying or ill. The five pending legislative provisions have been discussed and promised for a long time and they can no longer be delayed. These measures need to be taken this year (2007) (they were promised last year). Justice delayed is justice denied.

Institutional measures

The mission met and discussed with all the relevant line ministries and they were all very forthcoming with information. The mission was also aware that working groups and coordination bodies have been set up in the past to take forward various legislative and practical measures. The mission remained, however, concerned by what continued to be major gaps in coordination, both within ministries and between them. This probably reflected competencies and institutional issues which needed to be addressed. Reporting of occupational diseases has been a major and important area where the consequences of this lack of clear lines of authority or reporting have had a major impact, particularly on the lives of individuals. It is now urgent that there be put in place clear and transparent criteria for diagnosing occupational diseases and clear lines of reporting of occupational diseases from the enterprise via the local and on to the national level. The absence of clarity in this area has had an irreparable impact on the reliability of data and statistics concerning persons affected by asbestos-related diseases. The mission did not meet the Ministry of Finance, a key ministry for taking forward almost all of these measures which could avoid or reduce the delay currently being experienced. The mission, however, also understood that it is also an issue of priority for each of the line ministries concerned in the allocation of their own resources.

Urgent measures for workers affected by asbestos at Salonit-Vranjic and Azbest

The mission had the opportunity to visit the site of the Salonit-Vranjic factory and to benefit from a first-hand view of the current conditions prevailing, as well as information on the working methods and procedures of the factory when it was operational. The mission’s assessment is that, in view of the working methods of the factory, there is no room for doubt that the workers of that factory have been exposed to asbestos and that their disease is occupational. Considering that the age group of many of the workers affected by asbestosis today is above 50 and most of them had worked for more than 25 years in plants producing asbestos products, that they are ill, that the companies they have worked for have been closed or gone bankrupt, that most of them have not been able to benefit from an invalidity pension under the applicable legislation, and that every day their health situation further deteriorates, it has become not only urgent but also imperative that action be taken without delay to ensure that these workers benefit from appropriate care and protection, as well as compensation. The mission urged the Government to take action without delay, particularly since the workers who currently benefit from contracts with the Environment Fund are expected to cease receiving further benefits at the end of April 2007. It is now urgent that the draft Law on conditions for acquiring the right to old-age pensions for employees who have been professionally exposed to asbestos are submitted to ECOSOC and subsequently to Parliament for adoption. The mission considered this to be the first action to be prioritized. An alternative would be the urgent adoption of a special decree providing for the specific situation of the workers concerned.

The mission also recommended that action be stepped up as a matter of urgency to decontaminate the premises and to rehabilitate them prior to their use for any other activity, so that workers who are employed in those premises can benefit from a safe and healthy working environment. The mission also emphasized the urgency in view of the asbestos waste stored on the site and its impact more generally on the environment and the community living in the area. This measure should also be applicable to all other sites where asbestos products have been produced and other waste disposal sites where asbestos products have been deposited.

Judicial measures

Paying due regard to the principle of the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary as essential for the rule of law, it is nonetheless important that legal claims for asbestos-related diseases be heard expeditiously and judicial decisions handed down in a timely manner. The situation of these workers does not permit lengthy hearings. It is for this reason that the mission also recommended that the adoption of the draft Law on reimbursement of the insurance claims of workers professionally exposed to asbestos be prioritized.

Preventive measures

In more general terms, the mission also highlighted the importance of prevention and the need for a comprehensive safety and health prevention plan. The mission recommended the adoption of a national policy on OSH on the basis of the ILO Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187). More specifically, in the case of asbestos, an awareness-raising campaign should be launched targeting workers in sectors where asbestos products may be encountered, in particular, the construction, ship repair, ship scrapping and port sectors. The Office for Social Partnership should play a key role in this area, as well as in the adoption of the national policy on OSH. This would allow for the involvement of employers’ and workers’ organizations in promoting OSH.

ILO action

The International Labour Office remains ready and willing to continue to assist the Government to comply fully with Convention No. 162 and, more specifically, in implementing the various measures referred to above. It is willing to provide technical assistance concerning legislative reviews, training and capacity building for the tripartite constituents in the field of OSH and, in particular, as regards Convention No. 162. In the latter area, the training would cover criteria for determining occupational disease caused by asbestos in line with the most up to date ILO guidelines in the field. The ILO Office in Budapest would continue to be in close cooperation with the Government.

7. The Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to give effect to the recommendations made by the mission and to ensure full compliance with the Convention.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 97th Session and to reply in detail to the present comments in 2008.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

1. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s brief report submitted in September 2005. The Committee also notes the observations received from the Association of Workers Affected by Asbestosis-Vranjic (hereinafter, the Association) in 2004, and the Government’s response thereto in a communication dated 26 October 2004. The Committee further notes the observations submitted by the Association this year, which have been transmitted to the Government for its comments. In its submission the Association provides certain new observations related to a proposed new draft law, but in other respects the observations made are in all essential parts the same as those raised in their 2004 submission, to which the Government has responded in detail in its 26 October 2004 communication. The Committee notes that in its 2005 report the Government has not made any further comment, nor submitted any further information in respect of the observations made by the Association in 2004.

2. Article 3 of the Convention. Measures taken for the prevention and control of, and protection of workers against, health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos. Reference is made to the concerns raised by the Association in the Committee’s previous comment and to the additional information provided by the Association this year. The Committee notes that according thereto the conditions at the Salonit factory detailed in its earlier observations have not improved but on the contrary have deteriorated (see paragraph 6 below). The Committee regrets to note that the Government’s 2005 report contains no information regarding measures taken for the prevention and control of, and protection of workers against, health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos at this factory. Against this background, the Committee expresses deep concern over the ongoing life-threatening working conditions at the Salonit factory and requests the Government urgently to take all the appropriate measures required to address this situation and to limit the risk for further damage that may be caused to the health, not only of workers at the factory, but also of those living in the vicinity. The Committee requests the Government to provide it with a detailed report on all the measures taken for the prevention and control of, and protection of workers against, health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos at the Salonit factory.

3. Articles 3 and 4. Framing of national laws and regulations. With reference to its previous comments regarding the absence of national legislation giving effect to the Convention, the Committee notes that the Government refers to a draft final bill on the entitlement to old-age pensions for workers who have been occupationally exposed to asbestos and indicates that a list of toxic agents is being developed including reference to asbestos fibres which prohibits the production, marketing and use of asbestos fibres. The Committee also notes that the Government indicates that draft rules on occupational safety in work with asbestos to give effect to the provisions of the Convention are being prepared. In this context, the Committee recalls that it had in its direct request of 2003 drawn the attention of the Government to the need to take appropriate legislative measures to give effect to Articles 9, 10, paragraph (a), 13 and 20, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Further, in its most recent submission the Association indicates that it was aware of this new draft, but that it had not been consulted thereon. The Association further submits highly critical observations against the drafting process of this law as the person in charge of preparing the draft law is the vice-president of the supervisory council of the Salonit factory and as none of the competent state organs has consulted with the Association on the proposed draft law, and is also highly critical of the content of the draft law as it only appears to prohibit the production of asbestos but does not regulate all other asbestos-related activities such as the handling of asbestos waste, and as it appears to include provisions which are unduly favourable to the employer. While inviting the Government to respond to the observations made by the Association, the Committee urges the Government to take all appropriate measures in the near future to ensure the full application of the Convention, to consult with the most representative organizations of employers and workers on any draft legislation to give effect to the Convention, to ensure that the draft legislation is adopted and effectively implemented, and to submit a copy of the said legislation to the Committee as soon as it has been adopted. The Committee also invites the Government to seek the assistance of the ILO by submitting any draft law to it for examination in the light of the provisions of the present Convention.

4. Article 5. Inspection. The Committee takes note of the Association’s observation indicating that there are shortcomings with regard to the carrying out of inspections by the State Inspectorate, Industrial Safety Section, Branch Office, Split, and that the inspectors do not appear to have adequate technical equipment at their disposal to measure the concentration of asbestos at workplaces. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner, frequency and adequacy of inspection and the technical equipment used by the concerned inspectors to measure the concentration of asbestos in the Salonit factory.

5. Article 18. Special protective clothing and washing facilities. The Committee takes note of the Association’s renewed observations indicating that no special protective clothing is provided to the concerned workers and that the work clothing provided by the employer (Salonit) is simple clothing used in general industrial processes, that there are no facilities for the handling, storage and cleaning of used work clothing, nor any washing facilities available for the workers concerned. The Committee recalls that it had in its direct request of 2003 drawn the attention of the Government to the need to review section 126 of the Rules on Safety at Work in Processing Non-Metallic Raw Materials, 1986, in the light of the requirements of Article 18, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the Convention and to take necessary measures to give effect to Article 18, paragraph 4, of the Convention. Noting that the Government’s report is silent on these issues, the Committee reiterates its request to the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to address these issues.

6. Article 19. Disposal of waste containing asbestos. The Committee takes note of the Association’s observation that disposal of waste containing asbestos in open air in the factory space of Salonit continues up to this date even after the ruling issued in July 2004 by the inspectors obliging the employer to cover temporarily stored asbestos with an impermeable foil. It alleges that this situation has come about because of the lack of proper monitoring. It further alleges that this situation puts not just the concerned workers at risk but also the population in the vicinity as the factory is located only 50 metres away from a highly urbanized area. The Association also indicates that any further delay in addressing the situation will result in enormous damage to the health of the workers concerned and the population in the vicinity. The Committee recalls that, in its previous comments, it had stressed the need for taking necessary measures in this regard expeditiously as the handling of asbestos waste by the factory seems to jeopardize not only the health of workers exposed, but also the health of the general public which comes into contact with asbestos released into the air due to the incorrect handling of asbestos waste. The Committee requests the Government to immediately take the necessary measures to ensure that the disposal of the asbestos-containing waste from the Salonit factory takes place in a manner that does not pose any health risk to the workers concerned and to the population in the vicinity of the factory and to indicate the measures so taken in its next report.

7. Article 21, paragraph 2. Monitoring of workers’ health. The Committee takes note of the Association’s observation that more than 200 workers of the factory have died due to pleural mesothelioma and that, in addition, the majority of the remaining workers suffer from asbestosis, pleural mesothelioma or lung cancer caused by exposure to asbestos. The Committee also notes the indication of the Association that the competent health authorities have not made sufficient efforts to identify the potentially large number of persons - including both present and former workers as well as inhabitants in the vicinity of the factory - that may have been exposed to asbestos and that may be at risk for developing asbestos-related diseases. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken by the competent health authorities to regularly monitor the health of the workers of the factory. It also requests the Government to provide the statistics maintained in this respect along with its next report.

8. Article 21, paragraph 4. Efforts made to provide workers unable to pursue their work for medical reasons with other means of maintaining their income. The Committee notes the Association’s observation that 51 workers in Salonit for whom continued assignment to work involving exposure to asbestos was found to be medically inadvisable, were assigned to other work that substantially reduced their income. With reference to the requirement in this Article for the Government to make every effort, consistent with national conditions and practice, to provide workers concerned with other means of maintaining their income, the Government is requested to provide details regarding all efforts made to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

9. Article 22. Information and education of workers. The Committee takes note of the Association’s observations that no arrangements have been made for the promotion of dissemination of information and the education of the concerned workers with regard to health hazards due to exposure to asbestos and the methods of its prevention and control. The Committee recalls in this context that it had in its direct request of 2003 requested the Government to indicate whether the education and training activities set forth under sections 27-30 of the Act on Safety and Health Protection at the Workplace, 1996 are founded on the basis of written policies and procedures and if that was not the case, to take the necessary measures obliging the employer to establish written policies and procedures on measures for the education and periodic training of workers. Noting that the Government has not provided any information in this respect in its report, the Committee urges the Government to take the most expeditious action to provide the appropriate information and education to the workers concerned with regard to health hazards due to exposure to asbestos and the methods of prevention and control, and to inform the Committee on this issue in its next report.

10. Part V of the report form. Practical application of the Convention. The Committee invites the Government to continue to provide information on the practical application of the Convention. It also once again requests the Government to indicate whether the Salonit factory still produces products containing asbestos and whether any action has been taken also to protect the general public which might have been in contact with and used these products.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 95th Session and to reply in detail to the present comments in 2006.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee takes note of the comments made by the Association of Workers Affected by Asbestosis-Vranjic, alleging the lack of substantial changes in the national legislation and practice to ensure that effect is given to the provisions of this Convention. In the view of the Association of Workers Affected by Asbestosis-Vranjic, the Government failed to make any significant effort in this respect. They claimed in particular shortcomings with regard to the carrying out of inspections. According to the Association, inspectors appear not to have adequate technical equipment at their disposal to measure the concentration of asbestos at workplaces. The Committee notes the comments transmitted by the Government in response to the matters raised by the Association of Workers Affected by Asbestosis-Vranjic, which the ILO received on 22 November 2004. The Government, for its part, while recognizing certain discrepancies between the requirements set out in the Convention and the Croatian legislation, indicates that a draft Law concerning the Production of and Trade in Asbestos Products in Croatia, has been elaborated, which contains provisions concerning the problems related to the processing of asbestos, such as the prohibition of the production and sale of asbestos products and the transition to non-asbestos production, the entitlement to old-age pensions for workers who have been exposed to asbestos in the course of their work, the granting of compensations for injuries, etc. The draft has been submitted to all interested in the settlement of the problem for their opinion. Moreover, the Government affirms its intention to elaborate draft regulations to harmonize national legislation with the Convention. The Committee, while hoping that the above draft Law will be adopted in the near future, would recall that the most representative organizations of employers and workers concerned need to be consulted on the legislative text before its adoption. With regard to inspections, the Government indicates that inspections are carried out on a regular basis. The Government confirms, however, that inspectors have called, in May 2004, for measures to be taken with regard to the stated incorrect deposit of asbestos waste, which caused the release of asbestos dust into the air of the working environment and that, in July 2004, the inspectors issued a ruling obliging the employer to cover temporarily stored asbestos with an impermeable foil. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to take practical measures on a regular basis.

The Committee finally notes the discussions in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2003. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to proceed to the adoption of the draft Law concerning the Production of and Trade in Asbestos Products in Croatia, and to elaborate, without further delay, the announced draft regulations to harmonize national legislation with the Convention, which prescribe the specific measures to be taken for the prevention, control of and protection of workers against health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos, in conformity with the provisions of the Convention. With respect to the elaboration of draft regulations, the Committee wishes to remind the Government of the possibility to have recourse to the technical assistance of the ILO. The Committee further would underline the need for taking the necessary measures quickly, as for example the apparent handling of asbestos waste seems to jeopardize not only the health of workers exposed, but also the health of the general public which comes into contact with asbestos released into the air due to the incorrect handling of asbestos waste.

The Committee will re-examine the matters raised by the Association of Workers Affected by Asbestosis-Vranjic in detail as well as the comments supplied by the Government thereon at its next session, in the light of the information provided by the Government in its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s reports. It notes the information supplied by the Government in relation to Article 2, subparagraph (g), and Article 21, paragraphs 4 and 5, of the Convention. Further to its observation, it would draw the Government’s attention to the following points.

1. Articles 1 and 3 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that occupational safety and health aspects are governed by the Occupational Safety Act, which, however, does not contain any specific provisions concerning the measures to be taken to prevent the workers exposed to asbestos in the course of the work from adverse health risks. The only provisions related to asbestos are comprised in the Rules on Safety at Work in Processing Non-Metallic Raw Materials, 1986, which however do not provide for an adequate application of the provisions of the Convention. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication contained in its report as well as the declaration of the Government representative in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards at the 91st Session of the International Labour Conference in 2003 that the respective legislation is under review and that the adoption of new regulations is envisaged, particularly because of the fact that the Croatian Government, having signed the Stabilization and Association Agreement, is obliged to harmonize its legislation with the legislation of the European Union (EU) including the EU Directive related to asbestosis. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon take the necessary legislative action to adopt laws or regulations concerning the use of asbestos, which prescribe the specific measures to be taken for the prevention, control of and protection of workers against health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos. In this connection, the Committee recalls that these laws and regulations have to be reviewed periodically in the light of technical progress and advances in scientific knowledge, in conformity with Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention.

2. Article 9. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Rules on Safety at Work in Processing Non-Metallic Raw Materials, 1986, provides for adequate workplace hygiene measures when performing work in which the exposure to asbestos may occur. The Committee ventures to point out that Article 9(a) of the Convention calls for the adoption of engineering controls and work practices, to provide for the health protection of workers against adverse effects of their exposure to asbestos. In this context, workplace hygiene measures represent one of the measures to be taken. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary additional measures in the context of the revision of the legislation to give full effect to this provision of the Convention. As concerns the prescription of special rules and procedures, including authorization, for the use of asbestos or certain types of asbestos or products containing asbestos or for certain work processes, provided for in Article 9(b) of the Convention, the Government indicates that no special rules or procedures equivalent to this provision of the Convention exist in the Croatian legislation. The Committee accordingly invites the Government to incorporate equivalent provisions into national legislation in the framework of its envisaged legislative action to harmonize the national legislation with the respective EU directives and to give effect to this Convention.

3. Article 10. With regard to the replacement of asbestos or products containing asbestos by other substitute materials or products, evaluated harmless or less harmful, the Committee notes the Government’s explanation that section 46, subsection 2, of the Act on Safety and Health Protection at the Workplace, 1996, stipulating that dangerous substances may only be used if the same work result cannot be achieved by using other harmless substances, aims at giving priority to the substitution of carcinogenic substances by less harmful substances over the work result to be achieved. The Government adds that the adoption of rules related to carcinogenic substances is planned in which the replacement requirement of carcinogenic substances by harmless or less harmful substances is highlighted. The Committee accordingly hopes that the Government will soon adopt the rules indicated above prescribing in unequivocal terms for the substitution of asbestos or products containing asbestos by other substitute material or products, and requests the Government to communicate a copy of them as soon as they have been adopted.

4. Article 13. As to the notification to the competent authority of certain types of work involving exposure to asbestos, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that this requirement will be included in the amendments of the Rules on Safety at Work in Processing Non-Metallic Raw Materials, 1986. The Committee hopes that the amendments to the above Rules will be adopted soon, in order to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

5. Article 18, paragraphs 2, 3 and 4. With regard to the handling and cleaning of used work clothing and special protective clothing, the Government refers to sections 122-125 of the Rules on Safety at Work in Processing Non-Metallic Raw Materials, 1986, obliging the employer to provide facilities with separate lockers for clean and contaminated clothing, as well as appropriate washrooms. The Committee while noting that these provisions do not regulate the cleaning of used clothing and special protective clothing, observes that section 126 of these Rules provides for the "… workers’ obligation to clean their work clothing and wash themselves after finishing their work". It points out that Article 18, paragraph 2, of the Convention, calls for measures to be taken which provide that the cleaning of used work clothing and special protective equipment is to be carried out under controlled conditions, in order to prevent the release of asbestos dust. Moreover, Article 18, paragraph 3, of the Convention, prohibits the taking home of work clothing and special protective clothing and of personal protective equipment. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to review the provision of section 126 of the Rules on Safety at Work in Processing Non-Metallic Raw Materials, 1986, in the light of the requirements set forth by Article 18, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the Convention. In this context, the Committee ventures to point out that in application of Article 18, paragraph 4, of the Convention, the employer shall be responsible for the cleaning, maintenance and storing of work clothing, special protective clothing and personal protective equipment. The Committee accordingly hopes that the Government, as stated by itself, will not fail to take the necessary legal action to ensure that the responsibility for cleaning, maintenance and storing of work clothing, special protective clothing and personal protective equipment is placed on the employer.

6. Article 20, paragraph 2. As to the keeping of records of the monitoring of the working environment and of the exposure of workers to asbestos, the Committee notes that section 50, subsection 1, of the Act on Safety and Health Protection at the Workplace, 1996, requires the employer to inspect the workplaces where work process include, inter alia, the use or manufacture of dangerous substances. The methods of measurement are defined in the Rules on the monitoring of the working environment, machines and equipment, which pose a health hazard. The Committee while taking note of the above provisions recalls the Government that this provision of the Convention obliges the employer to keep records of the monitoring of the working environment and of the exposure of workers to dangerous substances such as asbestos. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the measures in the framework of the announced legal action, in the light of the requirements set forth in Article 20, paragraph 2, of the Convention.

7. Article 22, paragraph 2. With regard to the establishment of written policies and procedures for the education and periodic training of workers, the Committee noted previously that pursuant to section 27, subsection 1, of the Act on Safety and Health Protection at the Workplace, 1996, the employer shall not permit a worker to carry out work, which may represent a danger either to his own or the other workers’ safety, in an independent manner, if he has not received adequate instructions in safety and health. In the event the worker has not received adequate instructions, the employer is obliged to ensure that this worker is supervised by other workers who have received training on occupational safety and health protection. In this relation, the Committee noted that section 28, subsection 1, of the above Act requires the employer to provide training in occupational safety and health to workers prior to the commencement of their work, prior to the assignment to another job, and before the introduction of changes in the work processes. In addition, section 30 of the same Act requires the employer to provide occupational safety and health training for workers’ safety representatives. In its present report the Government refers to the provision of section 18, subsection 5, of the Act on Safety and Health Protection at the Workplace, 1996. The Committee observes that this provisions provides for written instructions to ensure that the work process is carried out in compliance with occupational safety and health regulations, and hence does not provide for written policies and procedures on measures for the education and periodic training of workers on asbestos hazards and methods of prevention and control. Recalling the provision of Article 22, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the education and training activities set forth under sections 27-30 of the Act on Safety and Health Protection at the Workplace, 1996, are founded on the basis of written policies and procedures. If that is not the case, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures obliging the employer to establish written policies and procedures on measures for the education and the periodic training of workers.

8. In addition, the Committee draws again the Government’s attention to the need to adopt measures in the framework of the announced legislative activities, on the following: definition of the terms in national law and practice of "asbestos", "asbestos dust", "airborne asbestos dust" and "exposure to asbestos" (Article 2, subparagraphs (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e)); consultations to be carried out with the most representative organizations of workers and employers concerned on the measures to be taken in prevention, control of and protection of workers against health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos (Article 4); establishment of procedures for dealing with emergency situations (Article 6, paragraph 3); the carrying out of demolition of plants and structures containing asbestos only by employers or contractors who are recognized by the competent authority as qualified and who are empowered to do so (Article 17, paragraph 1); measures to be taken in relation to demolition of plants containing friable asbestos insulation materials, and removal of structures or building containing asbestos (Article 17, paragraphs 2 and 3); disposal of waste containing asbestos (Article 19); access of workers concerned, their representatives and the inspection services to the records on the monitoring of the working environment and the workers’ exposure to asbestos (Article 20, paragraph 3); and workers’ information on the results of their medical examination and provision of individual advice concerning their health in relation to their work (Article 21, paragraph 3).

9. Part V of the report form. The Committee notes the documentation provided with the Government’s report reflecting the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice in the country. It invites the Government to continue to supply such information, which enables the Committee to determine the extent to which the Convention is indeed applied in practice.

Finally, the Committee would request the Government to indicate whether "Salonit" factory still produces products containing asbestos, and to indicate whether any action has been taken, to protect as well the general public which might have been in contact with these products.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report in response to its previous comments and concerning the observations made by the Association of Workers Affected by Asbestosis - Vranjic, on the application of the Convention, as well as the discussion held in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards at the 91st Session of the International Labour Conference in June 2003. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, contained in its report, that no changes to the legislation have been introduced yet. In this respect, the Committee however notes the declaration of the Government representative in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards at the 91st Session of the International Labour Conference in 2003 that in October 2000, the Ministry of Health has set up a multidisciplinary working group composed of the representatives of different ministries, institutes and trade unions to deal with the issue of workers who were professionally exposed to asbestos fibres and contracted occupational diseases. Between August 2001 and January 2002 a number of meetings of this working group took place, referring in particular to problems of diagnosis, treatment and claims for damages with asbestosis and related diseases. The Government representative further indicated that the respective legislation is under review and that the adoption of new regulations is envisaged, due to the fact that the Croatian Government, having signed the Stabilization and Association Agreement with the European Union (EU), is obliged to harmonize its legislation with the legislation of the EU as from 1 January 2002, including the EU Directive related to asbestosis. The Committee while noting the inspection report of the State Inspectorate, Industrial Safety Section, of 14 November 2002, which confirms the allegations made by the Association of Workers Affected by Asbestosis - Vranjic, urges the Government to take the necessary legislative action in the near future to adopt laws or regulations concerning the use of asbestos, which prescribe the specific measures to be taken for the prevention, control of and protection of workers against health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos, in order to give full effect to the provision of the Convention. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that the Office would be ready to provide technical assistance, in particular with a view to the elaboration of legislation on asbestos, in order to overcome the problems incurred in relation to the application of the Convention.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government concerning certain matters.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s reports. Further to its observation, it draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

1. Articles 1 and 3 of the Convention. The Committee notes section 21, subsection 1, of the Labour Code, 1995, requiring the employer in general terms to maintain, inter alia, the workplace in a way which guarantees the protection of life and health of workers in accordance with specific laws and other regulations, and in accordance with the nature of the job carried out. In the same way, section 8 of the Act on safety and health protection at the workplace, 1996, declaring safety and health protection at the workplace as an integral part of the organization of work and the work process, prescribes that safety and health protection shall be carried out through safety and health activities at work and the application of recognized, contracted and laid down rules as well as through supplementary measures and instructions determined by the employer. To this effect, section 18, subsection 1, of the above Act requires the employer to make a risk assessment in order to take the necessary protective measures and to minimize the safety and health risk. With regard to the work with dangerous substances, the Committee notes section 45, subsection 1, of the Act on safety and health protection at the workplace, 1996, according to which the employer is obliged to promote occupational safety and health protection by applying less dangerous technologies, work methods or substances. Section 45, subsection 2, of that Act provides that the employer must apply safety and health protection regulations in accordance with the manufacturer’s regulations and instructions. Moreover, section 46, subsection 2, of this Act permits the use of dangerous substances only if the same work result cannot be achieved by using other non-dangerous substances. In the case that the replacement of dangerous substances by harmless substances is not possible, subsection 3 stipulates that the employer must find out whether the risks involved in the use of dangerous substances can be reduced through the application of different work methods. In this respect, the Committee notes the annex to the Rule No. 1791 of 7 September 1993, on the maximum concentration of harmful substances in the air of working premises and areas and on biological values, containing a list of harmful substances, which also includes asbestos. The Committee notes that, while the substances indicated on that list are not prohibited, section 5 of the above rule prescribes maximum tolerance levels based on an eight-hour working day with an average temperature of 20ºC for each of the substances. The Committee, taking due note of these laws and regulations, however, observes that there does not exist any specific legislation concerning the use of asbestos. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether legislative action has been taken or is envisaged to adopt laws or regulations concerning the use of asbestos, which prescribe the specific measures to be taken for the prevention, control of, and protection of workers against health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos. In this connection, the Committee further ventures to point out that these laws and regulations have to be reviewed periodically in the light of technical progress and advances in scientific knowledge, in conformity with paragraph 2, of Article 3, of the Convention.

2. Article 2, subparagraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (g). The Government is asked to indicate the meaning given in national law and practice of the terms "asbestos", "asbestos dust", "airborne asbestos dust", "exposure to asbestos", and "workers’ representative".

3. Article 9. The Committee notes that pursuant to section 10, subsection 1, of the Act on safety and health protection at the workplace, 1996, providing that, in case the risks for workers’ safety and health cannot be eliminated by the application of basic rules of safety and health protection of workers, specific rules regarding workers’ safety and health protection at work as well as specific work methods are to be applied. According to subsection 3, the aforementioned specific rules on safety and health protection cover also procedures to be applied when working with dangerous substances. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate whether such specific rules concerning safety and health protection at work have been adopted in application to section 10 of the Act on safety and health protection at the workplace, 1996, in particular with regard to the health protection of workers against the effects of their exposure to asbestos. If that is the case, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply a copy for further examination.

4. Article 10. With regard to the replacement of asbestos or products containing asbestos by other substitute materials or products, evaluated harmless or less harmful, the Committee notes that section 18 of the Act on safety and health protection at the workplace, 1996, obliges the employer to make a risk assessment regarding the use of dangerous substances. Section 46, subsection 2, of the same Act stipulates that dangerous substances may only be used if the same work result cannot be achieved by using other harmless substances. Hence, it appears to the Committee that the decision whether or not dangerous substances such as asbestos are replaced by less dangerous substances, depends on the work result to be achieved, and not on the availability of substitute substances. The Committee also concludes from the provision of section 5 of Rule No. 1791 of 7 September 1993 on the maximum concentration of harmful substances in the air of working premises and areas and on biological values, that the Croatian legislation in general does not provide for the prohibition of carcinogenic substances such as asbestos, but provides for maximum tolerance levels. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to ensure that, in the case where there is a reasonable substitute product, asbestos or products containing asbestos are indeed replaced by such products.

5. Article 13. As to notification to the competent authority of certain types of work involving exposure to asbestos, the Committee notes the Government’s indication contained in one of its reports that, while there does not exist any legal provision requiring the employer to notify to the competent authority of certain types of work involving exposure to asbestos, only two companies in the country process asbestos. Irrespective of the limited number of enterprises manufacturing asbestos, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether certain types of work carried out by these two companies must be notified to the competent authority, and, if so, the Government is asked to specify the legal basis requiring such a notification to the competent authority.

6. Article 18, paragraphs 2, 3 and 4. With regard to the handling and cleaning of used work clothing and special protective clothing, the Committee notes that section 126 of the Regulations on occupational safety and health concerning non-metallic agents, 1986, requires the adoption of regulations at enterprise level, to provide, inter alia, for the worker’s obligation to clean his work clothing. It would appear to the Committee that, in consequence, the adoption of regulations on the handling and cleaning of used clothing and special protective clothing to be carried out under controlled conditions are not envisaged. The Committee therefore points out that Article 18, paragraph 2, of the Convention, calls for measures to be taken which provide that the cleaning of used work clothing and special protective equipment is to be carried out under controlled conditions, in order to prevent the release of asbestos dust. Moreover, paragraph 3, of Article 18, of the Convention, prohibits the taking home of work clothing and special protective clothing and of personal protective equipment. The Committee accordingly invites the Government to review the provision of section  126 of the Regulations on occupational safety and health concerning non-metallic agents, 1986, in the light of the requirements set forth by Article 18, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the Convention. In this context, the Committee ventures to point out that in application of Article 18, paragraph 4, of the Convention, the employer shall be responsible for the cleaning, maintenance and storing of work clothing, special protective clothing and personal protective equipment. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to take the necessary legal action to ensure that the responsibility for cleaning, maintenance and storing of work clothing, special protective clothing and personal protective equipment is placed on the employer.

7. Article 20, paragraph 2. As to the keeping of records of the monitoring of the working environment and of the exposure of workers to asbestos, the Committee notes section 74, subsection 2, and section 75, subsection 1, of the Act on safety and health protection at the workplace, 1996, enumerating the subjects on which the employer is required to keep records or books on monitoring. The Committee notes that, according to these provisions, the employer is not obliged to keep records of the monitoring of the working environment and of the exposure of workers to dangerous substances such as asbestos. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether the measurements of the working environment, which have to be carried out pursuant to section 48 of the Act on safety and health protection at the workplace, 1996, have to be recorded, and whether these records have to be kept for a period prescribed by the competent authority. If that is the case, the Committee requests the Government to specify the legal basis providing for the preservation of these records. 

8. Article 21, paragraph 4. The Committee notes that, pursuant to section 36, subsection 2, of the Act on safety and health protection at the workplace, 1996, the employer is prohibited to assign a worker to his work in case the result of the medical examination shows that the worker examined does not satisfy any longer the health requirements to pursue the work with particular working conditions. In this respect, the Committee notes, however, that there is no provision prescribing the measures to be taken in consequence, in order to provide the worker concerned with other means of maintaining his income. Recalling the provision of Article 21, paragraph 4, of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that workers whose continued assignment to work with particular working conditions are provided with other means of maintaining their income.

9. Article 22, paragraph 2. With regard to the establishment of written policies and procedures for the education and periodic training of workers, the Committee notes that, pursuant to section 27, subsection 1, of the Act on safety and health protection at the workplace, 1996, the employer shall not permit a worker to carry out his work, which may represent a danger either to his own or the other workers’ safety, in an independent manner, if he has not received adequate instructions in safety and health. In the event, the worker has not received adequate instructions, the employer is obliged to ensure that this worker is supervised by other workers who have received training on occupational safety and health protection. In this relation, the Committee notes that section 28, subsection 1, of the above Act requires the employer to provide training in occupational safety and health to workers prior to the commencement of their work, prior to the assignment to another job, and before the introduction of changes in the work processes. In addition, section 30 of the same Act requires the employer to provide occupational safety and health training for workers’ safety representatives. With regard to the provision of Article 22, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the above described education and training activities have to be founded on the basis of written policies and procedures. If that is not the case, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated obliging the employer to establish written policies and procedures on measures for the education and the periodic training of workers.

10. In addition, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the need to adopt measures on the following: consultations to be carried out with the most representative organizations of workers and employers concerned on the measures to be taken in prevention, control of, and protection of workers against health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos (Article 4); establishment of procedures for dealing with emergency situations (Article 6, paragraph 3); the carrying out of demolition of plants and structures containing asbestos only by employers or contractors who are recognized by the competent authority as qualified and who are empowered to do so (Article 17, paragraph 1); measures to be taken in relation to demolition of plants containing friable asbestos insulation materials, and removal of structures or building containing asbestos (Article 17, paragraphs 2 and 3); disposal of waste containing asbestos (Article 19); accession of workers concerned, their representatives and the inspection services to the records on the monitoring of the working environment and of workers’ exposure to asbestos (Article 20, paragraph 3); workers’ information on the results of their medical examination and provision of individual advice concerning their health in relation to their work (Article 21, paragraph 3); and development of a system of notification of occupational diseases caused by asbestos (Article 21, paragraph 5).

11. Furthermore, the Committee notes that section 113, subsection 1 of the Act on safety and health protection at the workplace, 1996, requires the designated Minister to adopt regulations for the implementation of the Act within one year following the entry into force of the law. In view of this fact, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate the texts of regulations currently in force that implement the provisions of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to communicate a detailed report indicating for each Article of the Convention the provisions of national laws and regulations applying them.

12. Part V of the report form. The Committee finally requests the Government to supply, with its next report, information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice in the country, and to provide to this effect, e.g. extracts from inspection reports as well as information on the number of workers covered by the legislation, the number and nature of the contraventions reported, the number of occupational diseases reported as being caused by asbestos, etc.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2003.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

1. The Committee takes notes of the observations made by the Association of Workers Affected by Asbestosis - Vranjic - on the application of the Convention and the documentation annexed. The comments were communicated to the Government on 13 September 2002.

2. The comments of the association of workers concern the use of asbestos by the "Salonit" factory, owned until 1998 by the Croatian State, and its harmful effects both on the workers exposed to it and the population in the vicinity. The association of workers considers in particular that a total lack of information of the workers concerning the toxic effects of asbestos and a complete absence of adequate preventive and protective measures have caused so far the death of more than 200 workers and people living in the vicinity of the "Salonit" factory which currently employs 250 workers with an annual production volume of approximately 25,000 tons. According to the association of workers, the competent Croatian authorities and the employers are not respecting the international standards for the safe use of asbestos. The association refers in particular to the following Articles of the Convention by stating that:

(a)  Article 12. The increased concentration of asbestos dust in the air, stated and recorded by the regional safety at work inspectorate on 7 and 8 June 2000, is a consequence of the employer’s non-compliance with the standards spelled out by this Article of the Convention to prohibit in general the spraying of all forms of asbestos, and to concede only derogations in exceptional cases under the condition that the health of workers is not placed at risk.

(b)  Article 14. The employer failed to label the containers used for the storage of asbestos and products containing asbestos, and, at the same time, the workers concerned are not properly informed about the risks inherent in the production process of asbestos.

(c)  Article 18. The work clothing provided to the workers at the factory is only simple work clothing and does not correspond to the requirements for special protective clothing. In addition, while the employer does not take any action for appropriate cleaning of workers’ clothing as well as to put into function the existing washing facilities, the clothing of workers remains in continued contact with asbestos and workers exposed do not take a shower after work. The workers however, due to the lack of information, are not conscious of the necessity to wear special protective clothing to be cleaned in an appropriate manner and to take a shower after work.

(d)  Article 19. With regard to the handling of waste containing asbestos, the necessary precautions to prevent the release of asbestos dust are not taken during transport, and the asbestos waste is illegally stored in a place which is located in the immediate neighbourhood of the vicinity, the beverage factory and the main source of drinking water to the city of Split.

(e)  Article 22. The employer neglects his duties to ensure the provision of proper information through internal regulations or instructions or labels to workers exposed or likely to be exposed to asbestos with regard to health hazards related to their work. The only information available to the workers is contained in a workers’ brochure of the factory on the health risks caused by the inhalation of asbestos dust. The information contained therein however is misleading, since it declares, contrary to the published findings of the World Health Organization (WHO), that there is no proven correlation between cancer and the intake of asbestos through drinking water and food. Moreover, although the inspection services already revealed in its inspection report of 2000 a number of deficiencies with regard to, inter alia, the lack of protective measures taken against the release of asbestos-cement dust, and the lack of indications and announcements at the workplace concerning the noxious properties of asbestos, the employer has not yet taken any remedial action. Moreover, the employer continues to fail to inform the workers concerned on the toxic and harmful effects inherent in their exposure to asbestos.

The Committee urges the Government to communicate comments as soon as possible on the observations made by the Association of Workers Affected by Asbestosis - Vranjic, and will supply full information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in law and in practice.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government concerning certain matters.

[The Government is asked to supply particulars to the Conference at its 91st session and to reply in detail to the present comments in 2003.]