International Centre for Trade Union Rights

One step forward and two steps backwardAuthor(s): ANDREW WATTERSONSource: International Union Rights, Vol. 6, No. 4, Focus on health and safety (1999), pp. 8-9Published by: International Centre for Trade Union RightsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41935803 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 02:22

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

International Centre for Trade Union Rights is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to International Union Rights.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.25 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 02:22:31 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

OPINION □ HEALTH & SAFETY - EASTERN EUROPE

One step forward and

two steps backward

I

now

enviable

Many CEE

health

have

being

occupational

countries

respects

but

record

in

eroded this

some an in

in

is

CEE have in some

respects an enviable record in

occupational health but this is

now being eroded

PROFESSOR ANDREW WATTERSON works at the

Centre for Occupational and Environmental Health at De

Montfort University in Leicester, UK

RICH abysmally Europe

countries and

for North such

centuries America as many

to address have in Western

failed the

Europe and North America have failed abysmally for centuries to address the

major toll exacted by occupationally caused and occupationally related diseases in generation after generation of industrial workers. Less affluent countries such as many in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) have historically had a longer and in many respects an enviable record in terms of commitments to, investments in, and develop- ment of occupational health. The exceptions have been in such fields as epidemiology inform- ing hazard and risk decision-making and environ- mental health issues related to workplace pollu- tion. But increasingly the strengths of CEE occu- pational health, illustrated in part by some of the figures cited below, are being eroded often along with or as part of declining economic and social infrastructure.

The occupational health problems faced by workers in CEE countries will be familiar in med- ical and technical terms to workers anywhere in the world. It would, however, be wrong to view the CEE as a homogenous whole. Occupational health and safety standards and controls vary from country to country and industry to industry. It is also remarkably difficult to find accurate fig- ures anywhere in the world on occupational dis- eases. The Finns for instance probably have the best system of occupational disease reporting , the best health and safety at work standards and also in some instances the highest occupational disease rates. This reflects the poor reporting standards elsewhere in Europe.

Romanian working conditions are far worse than those in many Hungarian or Slovenian indus- tries. Textile plants may have far worse condi- tions than petrochemical complexes in some countries. Recently introduced western practices of using contract and sub-contracted service workers may lead to apparently good health and safety records in those mainstream industries attractive to Western or national investment such as the oil industry or pharmaceutical companies. Yet the hazards faced by contract maintenance workers on such plants may be less acceptable.

What data exist about CEE occupational dis- ease in Western European publications are frag- mented and of limited value. According to WHO reports in 1995, countries like Hungary, Bulgaria and Czech Republic had more workers employed in the primary sector than most Western Euro- pean countries and hence more workers were probably exposed to 'old' hazards. Noise related diseases reported in CEE reveal figures compara- ble with those in Western Europe for Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Poland yet much higher in Hungary than Western Europe. CEE has a rela- tively high rate of vibration-related occupational

disease related to prevalence of power tools in CEE. In Bulgaria 6.8 per cent of the workforce have reportedly been affected by this disease, 2.4 per cent in Germany.

Data on chemical exposures in CEE are relative- ly limited. 130,00 workers in Poland exposed to harmful substances, 70,000 to carcinogens, 15,000 to pesticides above TLV levels. Occu- pational disease caused by chemicals in the total working population runs up to 41.6 per cent in Finland, 56 per cent in Germany but only 28 per cent in Hungary and 29. 5 per cent in Poland. Bulgaria has an estimated 30,000 workers, exposed to lead, 70 per cent of these at relatively high workplace levels. Seven per cent of Rom- anian metal workers showed symptoms of acute lead poisoning. Occupational lead poisoning in Hungary, Poland and Germany has however been declining. Pneumoconiosis levels in the Czech Republic have been high and make up 33 per cent of all occupational diseases, the figure in Poland is 10 per cent, Germany 8.4 per cent and Finland 1.4 per cent. Russia in contrast has been a world leader for many years in setting standards preventing exposure of women to reproductive hazards

Agricultural workers in some areas may in one sense have benefited with the decline in agro- chemical usage in some CEE countries leading to reduced risks - thereby reducing potential risks from chemical hazards but many CEE countries had tighter controls and bans on hazardous chemicals permitted in Western Europe.

Little data on occupational asthma in CEE countries are available and it is not known whether this reflects under-reporting or less widespread use of certain 'newer' asthmagens. Very little is known about known about occupa- tional stress in CEE.

The run down of CEE economies and the loss of jobs may paradoxically have led to smaller workforces exposed to the most serious hazards as industrial investment declines and hence to an overall decline in occupational diseases. The dis- tribution of risk may, however, have altered. There has been a decline in investment in plant and a run-down of health and safety infrastruc- ture in operating industries that may well have led to more accidents and greater exposure of some workers to occupational health hazards. The latter phenomenon appears to be a major problem in the mining industries and iron and steel industries in such countries as Russia and Ukraine.

The problems now confronting CEE workers therefore relate to the organisational, informa- tional and political and economic influences of multi-national companies from Western Europe and North America in particular; the impact of

INTERNATIONAL union rights Page 8 Volume 6 Issue 4 1999

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.25 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 02:22:31 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

European funding bodies such as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development as well as EU research and development pro- grammes and of course all are overshadowed by bodies such as the WTO. The organisations reflect not a workplace health and safety or sus- tainable production agenda but rather the urgent and overarching need to further 'market princi- ples'.

The tragedy of CEE occupational health is that good practices and substantial knowledge bases have sometimes been destroyed completely this decade. For example, factory-based health care schemes operated in some respects in a far more effective way 10 years ago than they do now. Occupational medicine in CEE, in terms of resources and staffing, was in several respects a model worth following in Western Europe. The regulation including banning of substances, for instance particular pesticides, in countries such as Hungary and Poland also ensured better health and safety standards and practices for employees. Toxicology research which informed regulatory standards carried out in Slovakia, Russia and Hungary was for instance sometimes decades ahead of Western Europe practice although these strengths had limited recognition in the west.

Now we have seen a dismantling of some good practice and successful health and safety systems in favour of much more hazardous approaches. In Russia, some highly successful organic agricultur- al practices have been abandoned in favour of chemical treatments. The concern is that inferior materials, sometimes through aid programmes,

and hazardous and sometimes redundant tech- nologies with high hazards have been 'dumped' on CEE countries. East Germany had for some time a very effective non-chemical pest control system: now Western German chemical compa- nies are moving to fill the gaps.

The ideal approach would be to protect the strengths of CEE occupational health systems, build on them and fill some of the gaps. Europe and America could also benefit from exploring these systems more fully. At the same time, inter- national trade union information exchange on best standards in occupational health and safety, and the means to maintain standards and raise standards, will be vital. These desirable aims should be linked to the WHO Charter on Environment and Health with its commitment to community participation in risk assessments and risk management and to EU Health and Safety Management directives requiring worker partici- pation in health and safety. Otherwise, poor health and safety standards and related employ- ment prospects will threaten CEE and Western Europe. Bodies such as the ETUB and the recent- ly formed European Centre for Occupational Health, Safety and Environment (ECOHSE) should have an important part to play in the information dissemination, research and communication agenda on occupational and related environmen- tal health and safety related to the extension of the EU eastwards and with the machinations and interventions of the WTO ever present on the global hazards agenda.

Page 9 Volume 6 Issue 4 1999 INTERNATIONAL union rights

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.25 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 02:22:31 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions