Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2014, publiée 104ème session CIT (2015)

Repetition

Further to its observation, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the following points.

Articles 4 and 7 of the Convention. National policy. Reviews, either overall or in respect of particular areas. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the National Occupational Safety and Health Advisory Commission (COCONASHT), a body composed of workers, employers and the Government, met on four occasions in 2011 and two in 2012 up to the date of the sending of the report. The Government adds that, in accordance with the work programme for 2011, the Commission reported an overall completion rate of 98.7 per cent, and 44.3 per cent up to April 2012. The Committee observes that these percentages do not help it to understand the situation regarding the application of these Articles of the Convention, unless the Government were to indicate what the percentages refer to and provide details. The Committee further notes that, in relation to the strategic activity of the development of the National Occupational Risks Information System, the following progress was achieved: (a) exchange of information on occupational risks prepared by the Mexican Social Security Institute (IMSS) and the Secretariat for Labour and Social Welfare (STPS), and those prepared by the Institute for Safety and Social Services for State Workers; (b) the design of the national occupational safety and health survey, on which the completion rate is 60 per cent; and (c) extension of the coverage of the electronic module on occupational health. The Committee notes once again that the Government has not supplied the information requested relating to the sectoral tripartite bodies which participate in these reviews and the manner in which the sectoral reviews are harmonized so as to culminate in a coherent national policy. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate whether there are sectoral tripartite bodies which participate in the review of specific sectors, and, in this case, to indicate which sectors. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether such reviews are undertaken with a view to identifying major problems, evolving effective methods for dealing with them and priorities for action, and evaluating results, as required by Article 7 of the Convention; and to provide information in this regard.

Construction sector. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee welcomes that, in relation to the high accident rate in this sector, activities have been undertaken since 2008 with a view to regulating this sector, including the inspections carried out and the adoption of Standard NOM 031 STPS 2011 (construction – occupational safety and health conditions). With a view to the implementation of this Standard, it has been agreed with the Mexican Chamber of the Construction Industry (CMIC) to develop protocol agreements based on the type of construction (large-scale, medium and small), and that both the CMIC and the Secretariat for Labour and Social Welfare are engaged in the dissemination of this Standard. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether Standard NOM 031 STPS 2011 is binding and whether it has had an impact in terms of a fall in the rate of occupational accidents in the sector.

Article 9. Adequate and appropriate system of inspection. Programme of occupational safety and health self-management. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the objective of the Programme of Occupational Safety and Health Self-Management (PASST) is to encourage the introduction and operation in enterprises of occupational safety and health administration systems which correspond to national and international standards and are based on the regulations in force, with a view to promoting the operation of safe and healthy workplaces. The Government provides detailed information on the conditions for the admission to the programme; the requirements and stages which have to be completed to advance in it and to merit recognition as a “safe enterprise”; and the method of work and the impact of the programme in relation to occupational accidents in the various sectors of the economy. The Government adds that due to the short period of work in pozos (small-scale mines and pits), which is approximately six months, these are excluded from the programme, as the implementation of an occupational safety and health system involves earlier compliance with certain requirements and passing through certain stages which require over one year. The Committee also notes, from the tables contained in the Government’s report, the results of the implementation of the PASST in workplaces in various sectors of activity. It notes the information concerning the mining sector, in which the accident rate in the 18 work centres which have obtained the first level of recognition as “safe enterprises” is 44.3 per cent lower than the accident rate in the mining sector in 2011. The accident rate in the six work centres which have obtained the second level of recognition as “safe enterprises” is 58.1 per cent lower than the rate for the mining sector in 2011, and in the six work centres with the third level of recognition as “safe enterprises”, the accident rate is 81.9 per cent lower than the rate for the mining sector. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the inclusion of work centres in the Programme and its impact in terms of occupational accidents and diseases, particularly in the coal mining sector. It also requests the Government to indicate the accident rate in enterprises which have joined the PASST in relation to the accident rate in the same enterprises before joining the PASST, in order to demonstrate the progress achieved in the different categories of enterprises.

Articles 13 and 19(f). Protection of workers who remove themselves from work situations presenting an imminent and serious danger. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government provides, as an example, the case of Aurico Gold of Mexico, in which work was interrupted as a result of a tremor which, on 6 March 2012, caused the death of one person, who was engaged in demonstration work in a former mine in view of the possibility of its exploitation once again. On 10 March 2012, the same enterprise indicated that the workers decided to leave their workplaces out of fear of a collapse, which did not have consequences for the workers, who were accompanied throughout by the labour authorities. It also refers to the case of the Peñoles company, which distributes an information card to its workers indicating that in the event of serious danger work shall not be commenced until the relevant and necessary measures have been taken. Thirdly, the Government refers to a brochure entitled “Basic safety requirements to work in a coal mine”. The Committee notes that the brochure contains important information on OSH standards and is drafted so as to facilitate understanding. However, it does not appear to include the indication that any worker who considers it necessary to interrupt work in a situation in which there is reasonable justification to believe it presents an imminent and serious danger to life or health shall be protected from undue consequences. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that employers and workers in all branches of activity are aware that in such situations they have the right to the protection afforded by this Article, for example through training brochures and to continue providing information on this subject.

Article 15. Coherence and coordination. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government to the effect that up to now 22 coordination agreements have been concluded to promote occupational safety and health and strengthen labour inspection with State governments. These agreements are intended to provide the basis for the implementation of joint action in the field of safety and health, promote the use of self-compliance machinery, training, comprehensive safety and health systems and the strengthening of inspection and verification. It also notes the information on the progress made in examining the preliminary draft amendments to the General Regulations for Inspection and the Application of Sanctions for Violations of Labour Legislation, which envisage empowering inspectors to close workplaces when they find that workers are exposed to an imminent risk. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on this subject as well as any relevant indications concerning the progress made and the obstacles encountered in improving the coherence and coordination envisaged in this Article of the Convention.

Article 17. Requirement for employers to collaborate whenever two or more undertakings engage in activities simultaneously at one workplace. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, according to the Government, effect is not given to this Article of the Convention in the legislation and that, in the event that various employers or enterprises coexist or engage in activities at one workplace, each one is directly responsible for complying with the OSH regulations. The Government indicated that it considers that, in common areas of the workplace where several employers are active, the latter have to agree on the form in which they will comply with the applicable provisions. The Committee noted that this collaboration is precisely what the Convention regulates and that it is not an optional matter, but a requirement under this Article. It urged the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that effect is given to this Article of the Convention and to supply information in this regard. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, with reference to sections 13 and 15 of the Federal Labour Act and section 15A of the Social Security Act, that it is clear that when two employers coexist they have joint responsibility in relation to their obligations towards workers. The Government adds that Standard NOM 019 STPS 2011 respecting workplace safety committees establishes that other committees “can” be created taking into account subcontracting enterprises, which undertake work in the same workplace as the main activity. The Committee notes that the joint responsibility to which the Government refers in relation to section 15A of the Social Security Act appears to relate to social security obligations, and not occupational safety and health. With regard to workplace safety commissions, while noting that they may contribute to collaboration, the Committee further notes that they do not refer to employers, but to committees, and that the terms are not mandatory, but optional. The Committee therefore once again notes that the Government has not taken the necessary measures to give effect to this Article. The Committee once again urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that effect is given to this Article of the Convention and to provide information on this matter.

Application of the Convention in practice. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide statistical information on occupational accidents and diseases, with an indication of the trends and the main problems encountered in the various sectors of activity and regions. The Committee notes Annex 4 to the Government’s report, according to which the three sectors with the highest accident rates are the following: (1) the construction industry, with 3.8 occupational accidents for every 100 workers; (2) mining and quarrying, with 3.6 occupational accidents for each 100 workers; and (3) commerce, with 3.5 occupational accidents for every 100 workers. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the causes of the accident rates in each of these sectors and on the measures to address them, and requests it to continue providing statistics on this subject.