Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155) - Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) (Ratification: 1984)

The Committee notes the Government’s report received on 30 August 2012, a communication from the Independent Trade Union Alliance (ASI), received on 14 August 2012, and forwarded to the Government of 29 August 2012, and the Government’s observations on that communication, received on 12 November 2012. The Committee notes that the ASI’s communication refers essentially to labour inspection and it will examine it in the context of its examination of the application of the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81). The Committee also notes that part of the ASI’s communication refers to matters covered by the Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161), which has not been ratified by the country, and which cannot therefore be examined. Another part of the communication refers to the absence of consultation and the need to improve social dialogue in relation to occupational safety and health (OSH), and to dysfunctions and the need to improve coordination in the administrative structure, which are issues that the Committee has already examined and that it reviews once again in the present comment.

Articles 7. Reviews, either overall or in respect of particular areas, carried out at appropriate interval; 11(c). Establishment and application of procedures for the notification of occupational accidents; (e). Publication annually of information on measures taken, occupational accidents and occupational diseases, of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the indication by the ASI in 2010 that, according to the National Institute for Occupational Prevention, Safety and Health (INPSASEL), up to the third quarter of 2008, 68,119 serious morbidity accidents had been recorded, compared with 57,000 accidents recorded during the whole of 2007. It added that it is estimated that 90 per cent of occupational accidents are not reported. It also noted that, according to the ASI, INPSASEL would administer the OSH services in six sectors, and that it mentioned the petrochemical, oil, auto-parts and agricultural sectors. It further noted that in its 2011 communication, the ASI referred to the poor state of some installations belonging to the Venezuelan Petroleum Enterprise (PVDSA), adding that trade union leaders were urging the INPSASEL to assume the responsibility for and to supervise gas-filling plants throughout the country, and its observation that workers were not working in appropriate safety and health conditions. The Committee also noted that, according to a communication of the Confederation of Workers of Venezuela (CTV) of 2011, there had been an increase in occupational accidents in relation to ten years previously, due to a deterioration in the working environment. It added that there are no reliable statistics. Furthermore, according to the CTV, the petroleum industry is a case in point as accidents in the industry have increased dramatically over the past eight years and, according to a statement by the Secretary-General of the Federation of Petroleum Workers in August 2011, there were 500 occupational accidents in the industry and 15 deaths in 2011, and the PVDSA had dismissed workers involved in occupational accidents. With regard to the notification of accidents, the Committee noted the Government’s indication concerning the procedure with the online reporting of accidents being in its first phase. The Government added that the INPSASEL posts on its web page information on occupational accidents which occurred during the 2005–07 period and on occupational diseases during the period 2002–06. In a communication received on 2 December 2011, the Government indicated that during the first half of 2011 a total of 29,020 occupational accidents and 1,130 occupational diseases had been reported, but did not provide information on previous years. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report in 2012 that 30,907 occupational accidents occurred during the first half of 2012, and that 1,328 occupational diseases were declared on the website of the INPSASEL. The Government adds that the INPSASEL is in the process of reviewing and approving the occupational accident statistics for 2008, 2009 and 2010. The Committee once again requests the Government to make efforts to update the information available on occupational accidents so as to have available effective indicators in due time which will allow it to identify the sectors requiring priority action, so that it is able to review its national policy on the basis of reliable and recent data. It requests the Government to provide information on this subject. Furthermore, noting that the Government has not provided some of the information requested in 2011 on the application of these Articles of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to: (1) send its comments on the issues related to the increase in the number of occupational accidents and their notification; (2) indicate the trends in relation to occupational accidents by sector and the measures adopted or envisaged to deal with them, including the situation in the PVDSA, referred to in the communication; (3) provide information on the reviews carried out or ongoing in specific sectors, as indicated in Article 7 of the Convention; and (4) indicate the sectoral committees to which it referred in its previous comment, and provide information on their operation and activities.

Article 9. Adequate and appropriate system of inspection. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures adopted to guarantee the effective application of the preventive and protective measures established under the Convention including, but not exclusively, the strengthening of labour inspection. The Committee notes that, according to the report, the INPSASEL has formulated three new procedures for the strengthening of inspection systems: “comprehensive inspections”, which adopt a preventive and pluri-disciplinary approach; “updating” actions, focusing on the investigation of occupational accidents and the causes of occupational diseases; and actions in the context of the “Comprehensive Agrarian Inspection Plan” (PIIA). The Committee will examine this information in greater detail in its comments on the application of Convention No. 81.

In 2011, the Committee requested the Government to reply in detail in 2012 to its observation of 2011. Noting that in 2012 the Government provided a brief report which does not contain replies to the various comments contained in its previous observation, the Committee is bound to reiterate those comments, which read as follows:

Articles 4 and 8 of the Convention. Formulating, implementing and periodically reviewing a coherent national policy on occupational safety, occupational health and the working environment; measures to give effect to this Article by consulting with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations concerned. The Committee notes that, according to the Government in its report, the principle of the people as participants is a constitutional right set forth in section 5 of the Basic Act on Prevention, Working Conditions and the Working Environment (LOPCYMAT) which gives effect to Article 4 of the Convention, and that draft legislation, regulations and technical standards are submitted for consultation among the various social partners. The Committee also notes that section 10 of the LOPCYMAT establishes that the Ministry of Labour shall consult the employers’ and workers’ organizations in respect of its national policy and that it will take into account, for the elaboration of this policy, inter alia, statistics on occupational diseases, accidents and deaths; the Government adds that section 36 of the same Act establishes a National Safety and Health Council with the participation of employers and workers. The Committee notes, however, that the Government has not provided information on the way in which this section of the Convention is applied in practice, indicating, for example, the content of its national policy and whether this policy and its implementing measures have been and are discussed with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations concerned. This implies a process of application and periodical revision in consultation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations concerned, to ensure an evaluation of the national policy, the basis upon which the scope of future actions is determined. With respect to Article 8 of the Convention, the Government states that the Assembly puts into practice the so-called “parliamentarism of the street” which consists of discussing a number of bills with the citizens. It also points out that workers’ assemblies, workshops with safety officers, meetings with trade union organizations and business associations of a number of productive groups are also held. Furthermore, the Committee notes that, in its comments of 2010, the CTV indicates that the National Institute for Occupational Prevention, Health and Safety (INPSASEL) does not consult the trade union organizations. The CTV adds that the Government should use the tripartite consultation mechanisms established under the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), to improve the occupational safety and health conditions and reverse the present trend. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that Articles 4 and 8 of the Convention refer to consultations on national policy and ways to give effect to these, with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations concerned, and therefore discussions with the citizens does not replace consultations with the said organizations. The Committee requests the Government to send additional information on the content of its national policy; on the consultations held with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations concerned with respect to the formulation, application and evaluation of its national policy and the measures referred to under Article 8; and on the results of these consultations.

Article 5(e). Spheres of action that should be taken into account by national policy; the protection of workers and their representatives from disciplinary measures as a result of the actions properly taken by them in conformity with the policy referred to in Article 4 of this Convention. The Committee notes that, in accordance with section 44 of the LOPCYMAT, no safety delegate may be dismissed, transferred or demoted in his/her job, from the time he/she is elected until three months after the period for which he/she has been elected, without justified grounds previously approved by the labour inspectorate, in accordance with the Organic Labour Act. Noting that, according to the ASI communication in 2010, 400 safety delegates were dismissed at the end of the first quarter of 2008, the Committee requests the Government to indicate what its legislation considers “justified grounds” in the context of the said section; to send information on the application of this section in practice, including on the application of dismissal with “just grounds previously approved by the labour inspectorate in accordance with the Organic Labour Act”, and on the alleged cases of dismissal of safety delegates.

Article 6. Functions and responsibilities. Article 15. Coordination. With respect to its comments in 2009, in which the Committee noted that, according to the CTV, the LOPCYMAT had not as yet been fully implemented and the Social Security Fund was not yet in operation, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, it is untrue that the LOPCYMAT is not yet functioning. The Governing points out that in the context of the transition of the social security institutions, certain legal situations of occupational safety and health (OSH) fall within the remit of the Venezuelan Social Security Institute (IVSS); that the entry into force of the Social Security Fund will enable the remaining aspects to come into effect; however, there has not been a deterioration or vacuum with respect to situations regulated by previous laws and regulations. The Committee also notes that, according to the ASI’s communication of 2010, another delay with the LOPCYMAT is connected to the appointment of special prosecutors for occupational safety and health matters. In turn, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided the information requested in its previous comment on the difficulties encountered in formally setting up the National Council for Occupational, Safety and Health, to which section 36 of the LOPCYMAT refers. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the National Council for Occupational, Safety and Health is operating and to send information on which aspects and bodies governed by the LOPCYMAT are functioning in practice, and those which are not, as well as the Government’s plans to implement the Act in its totality.

Other issues. Article 5. Spheres of action that should be taken into account in national policy; Article 11(a)(b) and (d). Functions that should be covered by national policy; Article 12. Obligations on persons who design, manufacture, import, provide or transfer machinery, equipment or substances for occupational use; and Article 15. Coherence of the national policy and coordination between the various authorities and bodies responsible for giving effect to Parts II and III of the present Convention. Noting that the Government has not, in its report, provided information on the application of the above Articles, the Committee requests the Government to send information in this respect.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to adopt the necessary measures in the near future.