Article 28, paragraph 1, of Legislative Decree no. April 9, 2008, No 81, the following legislative decree no. 81/2008, provides that the risk assessment should be made taking into account, among other things, risks from work-related stress, according to the contents of the Europe Agreement of 8 October 2004. Because of operational difficulties reported repeatedly in order to identify the correct implementation of this legislative provision, during the adoption of corrective measures and supplementary to the aforementioned Legislative Decree no. 81/2008, was introduced in Article 28 paragraph 1-bis, which was attributed to the Advisory Commission to formulate methodological indications as to the proper performance of the obligation, designed to address the activities of employers , their advisers and supervisors. In order to comply by the deadline of 31 December 2010, the provision in Article 28, paragraphs 1 and 1-bis of Legislative Decree no. 81/2008, as subsequently amended, the Standing Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work has set up a tripartite committee of its own which, following extensive comparison among its members, has prepared this document, dismissed from Advisory Commission in its meeting of 17 November 2010.
methods indications were developed within and for the purposes identified by Law duly taking into account the extensive scientific production and available on the subject of the proposals received within the Advisory Committee and have been compiled according to criteria of simplicity, brevity and comprehensibility.
The paper suggests a methodological approach that represents the minimum level of implementation of the obligation of risk assessment of work-related stress for all public and private employers.
Definitions and general guidance
The work-related stress is described in Article 3 of the European 8 October 2004 - interconfederal as implemented by the Agreement of 9 June 2008 - as "a condition which may be accompanied by disturbances or malfunctioning of physical, psychological or social, and results from the fact that some individuals do not feel able to respond to requests or expectations placed in them "(art. 3, para. 1). As part of the work that imbalance can occur when the employee does not feel able to respond to work demands. However, not all manifestations of stress at work can be considered work-related stress. The work-related stress is caused by several factors specific to the context and content of work.
The risk assessment work-related stress is an integral part of risk assessment is carried out and (as for all other risk factors) by the employer using the Head of the Prevention and Protection (RSPP) with the involvement of medical competent, if appointed, and after consultation Representative of Workers' Safety (RLS / RLST).
E ', then, must first specify the methodology that allows a correct identification of risk factors for work-related stress, so that this identification derives from the planning and implementation of measures to prevent or, when it is not possible, minimization of this risk factor.
To this end, it is clear that the necessary activities must be carried out with respect to all workers, including managers and supervisors. The assessment looks at individuals but not homogeneous groups of workers (for example, organizational tasks or partitions) that are exposed to risks of the second kind a finding that any employer can do individually on account of actual business organization (may be, for example, shift workers, employees of a particular sector or those who perform the same task, etc).
Methodology The evaluation is divided into two phases: a necessary (preliminary assessment), the other possible, to be activated in the event that the preliminary assessment reveals the risk factors for work-related stress and the corrective measures taken Following that, the employer, have failed.
The preliminary assessment is to collect objective and verifiable indicators, where possible numerically appreciable belonging to at least three distinct families: I.
Sentinel events such as: injury rates, sick leave, turnover, procedures and sanctions, and reports of physicians, specific and frequent formal complaints by workers. The above events are to be assessed on the basis of homogeneous parameters identified inside the company (eg time trend of injury rates reported in the company).
II. Work content factors such as: work environment and equipment, loads and work patterns, working hours and shifts; match between worker skills and professional qualifications required.
III. Contextual factors of work such as: role in organization, decision-making autonomy and control, interpersonal conflicts at work, development and career development, communication (eg, uncertainty regarding the required performance).
In this first phase can be used checklists also apply by corporate entities to enable prevention of an objective, comprehensive and, when possible, parametric factors referred to in Sections I, II and III above.
In regard to the evaluation of the factors of context and content of the above (sections II and III of the list) need to hear the workers and / or RLS / RLST. In larger companies you can hear a representative sample of workers. The choice of methods by which workers feel is left to the employer in relation to the valuation methodology adopted.
If the preliminary assessment does not disclose the risk factors for work-related stress would have required the use of corrective actions, the employer is only required to give account in the document Risk Assessment (DVR) and provide a monitoring plan .
Unlike in the case where major elements of risk from work-related stress would have required the use of corrective actions, we proceed to the planning and adoption of appropriate corrective actions (eg, organizational, technical, procedural, communicative , training, etc). If corrective actions are ineffective, it shall, in the time that the company defines itself in planning interventions, the evaluation phase of the next (known as in-depth evaluation).
The detailed assessment involves assessing the subjective perception of workers, such as through different tools such as questionnaires, focus groups, semi-structured interviews, families of factors / indicators listed above. This phase refers of course to homogeneous groups of workers in respect of which the problems were detected. In larger companies it is possible that this phase of the investigation are made via a representative sample workers. In enterprises employing up to 5 workers, instead of these instruments in-depth evaluation, the employer may choose to use evaluation mode (eg meetings) to ensure the direct involvement of employees in finding solutions and monitoring their effectiveness.
Transitional and Final Provisions
The date of December 31, 2010, the commencement of the obligation under Article 28, paragraph 1-bis of Legislative Decree no. 81/2008, shall be understood as the starting date of the assessment activities under these methodological guidance. The sequencing of these activities and an indication of the period of assessment Final completion of the transactions must be reported in the risk assessment document. Supervisors, for the purpose of taking measures under its jurisdiction, and take into account the effect of the time schedule mentioned in the previous period.
In order to verify the effectiveness of the methodology shown here, also to consider additions to it, the Advisory Commission shall be drawn up a report within 24 months from the publication of these methodological guidelines, following the course of the monitoring activities made. The making of such monitoring will be determined by the Advisory Committee. The
Employers, on the date of approval of these methodological, have already assessed the risk of work-related stress in line to the contents of the Europe Agreement of 8 October 2004 - as implemented by the Agreement of 9 June 2008 interconfederal - no need to repeat the survey but are only required to update the same in the circumstances envisaged by art. 29, paragraph 3, of Legislative Decree no. 81/2008, as described in this document.
0 comments:
Post a Comment