Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2001, Publicación: 90ª reunión CIT (2002)

1. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee recalls that it noted the observations made by the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT) regarding the extension of the working day for operators and supervisors of the national telephone service, in accordance with Ministerial Agreement No. 709 of 31 December 1993, which resulted in risks involving the reduction in hearing, loss of sight and irreversible damage to the central nervous system due to permanent exposure to noise and harmful gas emissions. On that occasion, the Committee also noted the measures taken by the Government, and particularly Ministerial Agreement No. 136 of 23 February 1999. The Committee requested the Government to continue supplying information on the application in practice of these measures intended to afford protection to workers and supervisors in the telephone services against occupational hazards arising out of environmental noise and pollution. The Committee regrets to note that the Government has not complied with this request and urges it to provide the requested information in its next report.

2. The Committee also notes the communication, dated 3 July 2000, from the National Union of Workers of the Telephone, Annotation and Revision Services of the Ecuadorian Telecommunications Institute (IETEL) "17 May", affiliated to the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT) and the Ecuadorian Confederation of United Class Organizations of Workers (CEDOC), indicating that the telephone workers of the enterprises EMETEL-ECUADOR, EMETEL S.A., ANDINATEL S.A. and PACIFICTEL S.A. (formerly IETEL) are exposed to grave occupational hazards in the performance of their work. In this respect, the above trade union indicates that the workers can suffer the loss of their hearing capacity as a result of their permanent exposure to noise due to working for more than the statutory hours of work using headphones and audio-phones, as well as the loss of visual capacity due to their exposure to computer screens. It adds that, due to the excessive time spent exposed to the above factors, and particularly the inhalation by workers of the harmful gases given off by the maintenance batteries of the telephone system, certain workers have died of cerebral circulatory accidents and fluid in the lungs. The above trade union also indicates that ordinary working days should be applied to professional telephone operators and supervisors in Ecuador, as set out in section 4(a) of the Agreement of the Ministry of Labour and Human Resources No. 136 of 23 February 1999 (published in the Registro Oficial No. 152, of 19 March 1999).

3. In its comments, the Government states that communications enterprises use electronic equipment which prevent the operators being exposed to the occupational health problems referred to by the trade union. It indicates in this respect that the former audio-phones and manual connections are no longer used, as the processes are now computerized through optic fibre. As a consequence, the manual equipment which could emit toxic gases or produce vibrations or frequencies harmful to human beings are no longer used.

4. Leaving aside the Government’s comment to the effect that the trade union "17 May" of IETEL has no members, is not representative and has no connection with the ANDINATEL enterprise, in which the events commented upon by the worker’s organization allegedly take place, the Committee wishes to reiterate its request to the Government to provide information on the application in practice of measures, such as those setting the normal working day for telephone operators and supervisors at four and a half hours a day, as envisaged in Agreement No. 709, of 31 December 1993, and confirmed by Agreement No. 136, of 23 February 1999, to protect the abovementioned workers against occupational hazards due to noise and air pollution.

5. In view of the absence of information related to its previous comments, the Committee is once again addressing a request directly to the Government concerning the application of the Convention.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2002.]