Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2012, Publicación: 102ª reunión CIT (2013)

Convenio sobre la inspección del trabajo (agricultura), 1969 (núm. 129) - Estonia (Ratificación : 2005)

Otros comentarios sobre C129

Observación

2023

Solicitud directa

2023
2016
2012
2010
2008

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

Article 6(1)(a) and (b) of the Convention. Enforcement and preventive activities in the field of occupational safety and health in agriculture. The Committee notes from the annual labour inspection reports for 2010 and 2011 available on the labour inspectorate’s website (http://www.ti.ee/index. php?page=3) that many agricultural enterprises with five or more employees were covered by occupational safety and health (OSH) inspections, namely 138 agricultural enterprises (i.e. 34 per cent) in 2011, and 136 agricultural enterprises (i.e. 33 per cent) in 2010. In response to the Committee’s previous request concerning the coverage of inspection in all agricultural enterprises, including those with fewer than five employees, the Government indicates that the basis for the selection of agricultural enterprises for inspection has changed and that in 2011, as a result, 28 per cent of inspection visits in agriculture were now performed in enterprises with fewer than five employees. However, this new approach is not apparent in the labour inspection reports for 2010 and 2011, as there is no information on how many of the total number of 3,359 enterprises inspected related to agriculture. The Committee further notes that in 2010 the number of industrial accidents had mainly increased in the wood industry sector, where the largest number of accidents per 100,000 employees was registered in 2010 (1,954) and in 2011 (2,006). In this regard, the Committee notes the chemicals campaign “Risk assessment in the use of dangerous chemicals” in 2010, aimed amongst others at the wood industry, in the context of which 14 information days were organized in September–October in different cities of the country. The Committee further notes that the agricultural sector is the one in which cases of occupational disease are diagnosed most, and that the main causes are linked to physiological risk factors – mostly carpal tunnel syndrome and musculoskeletal disorders due to physical overload. The causes of these diseases are considered to be repetitive stereotypic movements, forced positions during work or excessive physical strain through the incorrect manual handling of loads, working positions, etc. The Committee further notes from the annual labour inspection reports that frequent infringements in agriculture and forestry were detected in relation to paths and passages, lack of training and safety instructions for employees and lack of adequate workplace health assessments, the risk of exposure to moving parts of work equipment and the manual handling of loads. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the specific preventive measures carried out by the labour inspectorate in agriculture, particularly in areas where shortcomings have been detected or have been identified as the cause of cases of occupational disease or industrial accidents. The Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on the outcome of inspections carried out in the agricultural sector and any other data on the application in practice of the legislation on labour inspection in agriculture and its impact in terms of improving the conditions of work of agricultural workers and, where appropriate, their living conditions and those of their families in agricultural undertakings.

Article 9(3). Specific skills and training of inspectors for the performance of their duties in agricultural undertakings. The Committee notes that in 2011 two training courses on OSH, each lasting two days, were given to half of the labour inspectors carrying out inspections in agriculture, as well as to OSH specialists from the central office of the labour inspectorate. Furthermore, subjects relating to agriculture, such as chemicals, personal protective equipment, ergonomics and noise, were covered in the general training courses for labour inspectors. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that, in the event of problems arising during inspection visits, inspectors can consult and obtain assistance from the Technical Surveillance Authority and the Health Board in the areas of machinery and chemicals, respectively. The Committee invites the Government to continue to provide information on the frequency, content and number of participants in the training courses provided for labour inspectors in areas particularly relevant to agriculture, and the impact of these training activities on the operation of the labour inspection system.

Articles 26 and 27. Annual report on the work of the inspection services and working of the labour inspection system in agriculture. Further to previous comments on this subject, the Committee notes that the annual labour inspection reports for 2009, 2010 and 2011 still contain little information on the activities by labour inspectors in agricultural undertakings and that an informed assessment of the work of the labour inspection system in the agricultural sector therefore still cannot be made. The Committee therefore once again asks the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the central authority publishes, either as part of the general annual report or as a separate report, additional information on the work of the labour inspection services in agriculture, covering each of the subjects set out in Articles 27(a)–(g). The Committee once again asks the Government to keep the ILO duly informed of the progress made in this respect.