Preventive measures have reduced the number and severity of occupational
accidents in many workplaces. Whereas the frequency of accidents at work fell
from 93 per 1,000 full-time workers in 1993 to 76 per thousand in 2002, accidents
occurring during leisure time remained more or less static at a much higher
level:
- 134 per 1000 insured persons in 1993 and still as many as 129 per 1000 in
2002.
A glance at the statistics on occupational diseases and accidents at work shows that accident frequency is still
very high in some sectors:
- for example, two out of three abattoir workers
sustained injury in 2002.
In the fields of engineering assembly, forestry, wall
and roof coverings, metal construction, equipment construction, locks and
closures, services, building construction and waste recycling, one out of every
three or four workers had an accident. Accident frequency is significantly
higher in small firms than in larger undertakings, where safety at work tends to
be better organised.
Occupational diseases are considerably less common than accidents at work. In
2001, 3700 cases of illness were recognised as occupational diseases. Whereas
one in 13 full-time workers in Switzerland sustained an accident at work, the
equivalent proportion for occupational diseases is 1 in 1000.
The main reason for the low frequency of occupational diseases is that the
insurance companies have very strict criteria for recognising them as such.
Article 9 of the Law on Accident Insurance provides that "occupational
diseases shall be deemed to be diseases due exclusively or predominantly, in the
course of occupational activity, to harmful substances or certain kinds of
work";
these are set out in the list of harmful substances and pathological conditions
due to certain types of work.
In
practice, proof is required in each case that the cause-effect ratio between the
disease and the occupational activity is at least 50%. Other diseases not
included in the list must also be recognised as occupational diseases if it can
be proved that they were caused exclusively or predominantly by the occupational
activity (cause-effect ratio over 75%).
A number of studies and sample surveys conducted in Switzerland and the EU show that a high proportion of workers
attribute their health problems to their occupations.
Hence the occupational diseases defined in insurance law account only for a very
small proportion of all diseases due to and associated with work.
It is now relatively rare for the single-cause occupational diseases mentioned
above to be invoked; instead, we are more likely to hear of heterogeneous
disorders, often with a substantial psychosocial component. An example is back
pain: detailed investigation of its causes does not reveal significant
correlations (not even fewer than expected) with exaggerated or insufficient
physical effort, but instead almost exclusively characteristics relatable to
"work satisfaction". Anyone seriously concerned with health protection at work would
do well to concentrate on the working climate and the organisation of work.
Furthermore, the various surveys conclude that, even if the
"classical" risk
factors such as noise, the carrying of heavy loads and pain-inducing postures
have partly declined, the world of work has developed in such a way that new
risk factors have arisen. The pace of work has speeded up and processes have
become increasingly dense. Again, the most damaging threat to health today is
probably the fear of redundancy.
The consequences are felt on the level of corporate management and of the
economy as a whole. Productivity losses impose a burden on individual companies,
and the economic cost to the countries of the European Union is put at 3-4% of
gross domestic product (GDP).
Yet it would be wrong to equate work with a threat to health! Consideration of
the state of health of the unemployed clearly shows that unemployment also
presents a substantial health risk. As we know, work can also be a source of
self-respect, self-confidence and hence psychological well-being.
Precisely these factors are taken into account in corporate health promotion.
The aim here is to make for a healthy workforce not by defensively seeking to
avoid risk factors but instead by strengthening individual resources.
Source: European Union
© European Communities, 1995-2006
Reproduction is authorised.
| 
