Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

Employment Injury Benefits Convention, 1964 [Schedule I amended in 1980] (No. 121) - Chile (Ratification: 1999)

The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government in its report for the period ending 31 August 2005, received in February 2006. It also notes the information sent by the Government in response to the comments submitted by the Autonomous Confederation of Workers of Chile (CAT), the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT) and the World Confederation of Labour (WCL) alleging, among other things, the failure to apply certain provisions of Convention No. 121 to the workers of CODELCO Chile – División Andina who have suffered total or partial work incapacity due to silicosis.

The Government indicates, in response to the concerns expressed by the above organizations, that: (a) 50 per cent of the 115 decisions by the health services (COMPIN), which found that silicosis was the cause of invalidity, were declared as being without basis by the health authority. Only 9 per cent of CODELCO’s active workers suffer from silicosis and not 28 per cent as is alleged; (b) the measures taken in accordance with legislation resulted in lower levels of exposure to silica between 1999 and 2004; (c) no worker was terminated with the intention of hiding the problem; those workers who expressed their concern were able to take advantage of voluntary retirement plans; (d) the División Andina  is authorized to act as a delegated social insurance administrator in matters of occupational hazards pursuant to section 72 of Act No. 16.744 and section 23 of Supreme Decree No. 101; (e) CODELCO allowed inspection authorities to enter its premises and is not exempt from Chilean law; (f) it is not more advantageous to allow workers to be exposed to the risks of silica than to invest in preventative measures. Workplace accidents imply for the employer the payment of medical benefits and the costs associated with work incapacity; (g) around 50 per cent of those workers diagnosed by computer-assisted axial tomography and x-ray do not actually suffer from silicosis. The COMPIN decisions were in error for using inadequate diagnostic instruments. Of the 13 appeals lodged by CODELCO with the Comere (appellate body), it was found that 11 individuals did not have silicosis: on appeal, the Social Security Superintendent determined that ten of the decisions nullifying the initial diagnoses were justified; (h) with regard to other cases, the Government indicates that four are currently under judicial consideration; (i) it also provides information on the measures adopted in applying section 184 of the Labour Code, 71 and 72 of Act No. 16.744 and 72 of Supreme Decree No. 594 of 1999; (j) CODELCO-Chile and all of its workplaces are in conformity with the relevant legal provisions, as demonstrated by the lack of violations registered by the competent authorities. In this respect, the Government points to a judgement from the Court of Appeal of Valparaiso on a protective appeal by a member of Parliament which was confirmed by the Supreme Court, in which three inspection services provided information that CODELCO had no existing infractions or fines.

The Committee notes this information. It notes, according to the Government, that 9 and not 28 per cent of CODELCO workers suffer from silicosis. The Committee considers that this still represents a high number of workers affected by silicosis and thereby constitutes a high risk. It hopes the Government will continue to take preventative measures in order to reduce to the minimum possible the levels of exposure to silica. The Committee asks the Government to provide, in conformity with Article 26 of the Convention, detailed information on the measures taken in this regard, as well as information on the inspections carried out in the mining sector and the corresponding reports and findings. The Government is further requested to provide information on the rehabilitation measures taken in order to prepare incapacitated workers to resume their previous activities or, if this is not possible, to perform an alternative gainful activity suitable to their aptitudes and capacity. Lastly, the Committee asks to be kept informed of all developments in the cases previously mentioned by the Government that are under judicial consideration.

The Committee will examine the Government’s report at its next session together with the information submitted by the Government in its next regular report due in 2007.