Occupational Cancer Convention, 1974 (No. 139) - Finland (Ratification: 1977)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

Previous comment on Convention No. 115Previous comment on Convention No. 119Previous comment on Convention No. 120Previous comment on Convention No. 136Previous comment on Convention No. 139Previous comment on Convention Nos 148, 170 and 174Previous comment on Convention No. 155 and its Protocol of 2002Previous comment on Convention No. 161Previous comment on Convention No. 162Previous comment on Convention No. 167Previous comment on Convention No. 176Previous comment on Convention No. 184Previous comment on Convention No. 187 

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on occupational safety and health (OSH), the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 115 (radiation protection), 119 (guarding of machinery), 120 (hygiene (commerce and offices)), 136 (benzene), 139 (occupational cancer), 148 (air pollution, noise and vibration), 155 and its 2002 Protocol (OSH), 161 (occupational health services), 162 (asbestos), 167 (safety and health in construction), 170 (chemicals), 174 (prevention of major industrial accidents), 176 (safety and health in mines), 184 (safety and health in agriculture) and 187 (promotional framework for OSH) together.

The Committee notes the observations of the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) on Conventions Nos 115, 120, 136, 139, 148, 161, 167, 184 and 187 and of the Finnish Confederation of Professionals (STTK) on Conventions Nos 139, 161, 162 and 187, communicated with the Government’s reports.

Application of Conventions Nos 115, 119, 120, 136, 139, 148, 155, 161, 162, 167, 170, 174, 176, 184 and 187 in practice. Measures to prevent occupational accidents and diseases. The Committee notes that, according to the Government’s reports, the number of work-related accidents for salary and wage earners fell from 96,396 in 2015 to 86,606 in 2020, but the private health and social services sector saw occupational accidents increase from 4,408 in 2015 to 5,651 in 2020. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that, while occupational accidents in the construction sector have generally decreased, work categorized under the “employment service” sector, which includes temporary agency work, shows a high frequency of accidents, with workers assisting in industry and construction experiencing the majority of accidents in that category. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the number of recognized occupational diseases in the working-age population has decreased for several years, with, in particular, fewer cases of noise-induced hearing loss and asbestos-related diseases. According to the SAK’s observations on Convention No. 148, however, noise injury remains the most common occupational disease in Finland and better protection of pregnant workers from noise and vibration is a topical challenge under focus. The Government does not respond to those observations. The Committee thus requests the Government to continue to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to decrease the number of occupational accidents and diseases, particularly in the above-mentioned workplaces with increasing or persistently higher rates of occupational injuries, and for those workers engaged in the "employment service " sector, including temporary agency work.

Article 11 of Convention No. 115, Article 6 of Convention No. 136, Articles 2(2) and 3 of Convention No. 139, Articles 15(3) and 20(1) of Convention No. 162, and Article 28 of Convention No. 167. Monitoring of exposure levels. Notification to the competent authority. The Committee notes the SAK’s observations on Conventions Nos 115, 136, 139 and 167 expressing concerns regarding the adequate monitoring, in practice, of workers’ exposure levels to benzene and radiation, and shortcomings regarding notifications of carcinogens to the register for workers at risk of exposure to carcinogenic substances and processes (the ASA register), particularly in the construction sector. The STTK, in its observations on Conventions Nos 139 and 162 also refers to an increase in the ASA register, in the period 2010–19, of about 3,000 workers exposed to carcinogens, and of workers exposed to asbestos (4,003 workers in 2019). The Committee takes due note of the Government’s indication that the rising number of workers exposed to carcinogens in the ASA register is linked to greater awareness of statutory notification requirements and to legislative reforms, including the adoption of the Act on the List and Register of Workers Exposed to Carcinogenic Substances and Methods (452/2020). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to further strengthen the implementation of statutory requirements regarding the monitoring of workers’ exposure levels to carcinogens, including benzene and asbestos, and of notification requirements to the ASA register.

Article 12 of Convention No. 115, Article 9 of Convention No. 136, Article 5 of Convention No. 139, Article 11 of Convention No. 148, Articles 3, 4 and 12 of Convention No. 161, Article 21 of Convention No. 162, and Article 11 of Convention No. 176. Occupational health services. Health surveillance and medical examinations. Following its previous comments on occupational health services, the Committee notes that one of the objectives of the Government Resolution entitled “Työterveys 2025” (“Occupational Health Care 2025”), published in 2017, is for all employers to have organized appropriate occupational health care, regardless of company size. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that 74 per cent of workplaces in Finland have no more than ten employees, according to a 2018 review, and that the Government has undertaken research and other measures to promote occupational health care for small businesses and entrepreneurs. According to the observations of the SAK and the STTK on Convention No. 161, however, some small employers fail to arrange occupational health care at all, and the implementation of occupational health services still has shortcomings, particularly for people engaged in various forms of casual employment, agency work and platform work. The SAK considers that, even in jobs with particular risks, medical examinations and guidance and counselling remain incomplete or wholly unimplemented. In addition, the SAK indicates in its observations under Conventions Nos 162 and 167 that occupational health care is still poorly implemented in the entire construction sector, and that people exposed to asbestos have difficulties securing medical examinations after their employment has ended. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that investigations are being envisaged to determine whether an alternative to the current occupational health card could be found, for the organization and implementation of occupational health care and health monitoring in construction work. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the measures taken to ensure that workers who are or have been exposed to asbestos shall be provided with such medical examinations as necessary, after their employment has ended. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to progressively develop occupational health services for all workers. Additionally, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of occupational health services in all sectors, including on the impact of initiatives undertaken in the construction sector in this regard.

Articles 5(c) and 19(d) of Convention No. 155, Article 4(3)(c) of Convention No. 187, Article 22(3) of Convention No. 162 and Article 7(b) of Convention No. 184. OSH training and qualifications. The Committee notes that, in its observations on Conventions Nos 162 and 184, the SAK expresses concerns regarding the adequacy of OSH training for certain workers engaged in asbestos demolition work, such as “posted” workers or entrepreneurs, and for foreign workers engaged in agricultural work. In its observations on Convention No. 187, the SAK also indicates that Finland lacks training criteria or qualification requirements for individuals responsible for OSH at the workplace, including OSH managers responsible for OSH cooperation and OSH representatives. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that adequate and appropriate training and comprehensible OSH instructions and any necessary guidance or supervision are provided to workers in agriculture, taking into account differences in language (Article 7(b) of Convention No. 184). It also requests the Government to provide further information on how employers ensure that all workers exposed or likely to be exposed to asbestos are informed about the health hazards related to their work, instructed in preventive measures and correct work practices and receive continuing training in these fields (Article 22(3) of Convention No. 162). The Committee further requests the Government to indicate whether it envisages adopting training criteria or qualification requirements for persons with OSH responsibilities at the workplace.

A.General provisions

The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous requests concerning Article 9 (labour inspection) of Convention No. 155, Article 3(c) of the Protocol and Article 3(3) (national preventive safety and health culture) of Convention No. 187, which responds to its previous requests.

I.Action at the national level

Article 2(1) of Convention No. 187. Promoting the continuous improvement of OSH by developing a national policy, national system and national programme. The Committee takes due note of the adoption in 2019 of the policy for the work environment and well-being at work until 2030, developed in consultation with social partners, which specifies the strategy of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health and guides its operations to ensure OSH at all workplaces, regardless of the form of employment. The SAK and the STTK, in their observations on Convention No. 187, take the view that certain OSH risks have yet to be adequately addressed, including psychosocial risks and OSH risks involved in platform work. In this respect, the Committee notes that the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health has adopted a Mental Health at Work Programme, implemented in cooperation with the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health and other partners. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken topromote continuous improvement of OSH and the results thereof, including the impact of the Mental Health at Work Programme.It requests the Government to provide information on measures taken towards the improvement of the OSH of platform workers and to address psychosocial risks of those workers.

Articles 4, 8, 13 and 19(f) of Convention No. 155. Prevention of injury to health occurring in the course of work. Protection of workers removed from situations presenting an imminent and serious danger. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the measures taken by the Government to reduce threats of workplace violence, including by setting the prevention of violence, harassment and inappropriate treatment in the workplace as an objective of the Implementation Plan for 2022–23 of the policy for the work environment and well-being at work until 2030. The Committee notes that, according to the SAK’s observations on Convention No. 187, threats of physical violence have arisen at approximately one in six workplaces (14 per cent) and direct physical violence had occurred at one in ten workplaces (10 per cent) during the 2017–20 period. The Committee thus requests the Government to provide further information on occurrences where workers have exercised their right to remove themselves from work situations which they had reasonable justification to believe presented an imminent and serious danger to their life or health. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the impact of measures taken toprevent injury to health, including due to violence and harassment at work.

Article 5(1) of Convention No. 187. Formulation, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and periodical review of a national OSH programme. The Committee takes due note of the adoption of the Implementation Plan 2022–23 for the policy for the work environment and well-being at work until 2030. The Committee notes that the actions in the Implementation Plan are monitored annually with reporting and their effectiveness assessed with agreed indicators. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the evaluation and review of the Implementation Plan 2022–23, in consultation with social partners, as well as on how this evaluation contributes to the formulation of subsequent implementation plans.

II.Action at the level of the undertaking

Article 20 of Convention No. 155 and Article 4(2)(d) of Convention No. 187. Cooperation at the level of the undertaking. In reply to its previous request concerning the right of higher-ranking workers to elect OSH representatives, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that senior staff are also deemed to be employees for elections as representatives. The Committee also notes the observations of the SAK on Convention No. 187, underlining that the Act on occupational safety and health enforcement and cooperation on occupational safety and health at workplaces (44/2006) only requires the election of an OSH representative at workplaces with at least ten employees, and that about 20,000 workplaces have fewer than ten employees. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the election of OSH representatives, in practice, in undertakings with less than ten employees, as well as on any other arrangements to promote cooperation between management, workers and their representatives as an essential element of workplace-related prevention measures in those workplaces.

Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161)

Article 16 of the Convention. Supervision of occupational health services. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s information on the results of labour inspections between 2016–21, including its indication that the multidisciplinary nature of occupational health services has clearly improved since 2015, and that only 7 per cent of occupational health care units fell short of satisfying basic conditions. The Committee also notes the observations of the SAK on Convention No. 161, according to which enforcement work in the field of occupational health is usually confined to verifying the existence of an occupational health care agreement. With reference to its preceding comments on the development of occupational health services, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on measures taken or envisaged to strengthen the supervision of the operation of occupational health services.

B.Protection against specific risks

Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous requests concerning Articles 3(1) (effective protection of workers in light of available knowledge) and 6(1) (maximum permissible doses) of Convention No. 115, which responds to its previous request.

Occupational Cancer Convention, 1974 (No. 139)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous requests concerning Articles 1(1) and (3) (list of carcinogenic substances and agents) and 6(a) (national laws and regulations) of Convention No. 139, which responds to its previous request.

Working Environment (Air Pollution, Noise and Vibration) Convention, 1977 (No. 148)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous requests concerning Articles 4 (national laws or regulations), 9 (technical and supplementary organizational measures) and 12 (control of the use of processes, substances, machinery and equipment) of Convention No. 148, which responds to its previous request.

Article 16(b) of the Convention. Appropriate inspection. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the results of inspections undertaken, as well as the observations of the SAK on Conventions Nos 120 and 148, which consider that clean air requirements gained new significance during the pandemic, and that attention should be paid to enforcement regarding air measurements. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that labour inspectors do not always oblige employers to measure airborne exposure levels, if they consider that the risks are assessed and managed by other means. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on measures taken to strengthen supervision of the application of Convention No. 148.

Chemicals Convention, 1990 (No. 170)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous requests concerning Articles 5 (advance notification, authorization, classification and labelling of chemical substances),and 12(d) (duration for maintaining records) of Convention No. 170, which responds to its previous request.

Prevention of Major Industrial Accidents Convention, 1993 (No. 174)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous requests concerning Articles 4 (coherent national policy),and 9(f) and (g) and 20(c) (consultation of workers and their representatives on the documented system of major hazard control, safety report, emergency plans and procedures and accident reports) of Convention No. 174, which responds to its previous request.

C.Protection in specific branches of activity

Hygiene (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1964 (No. 120)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous requests concerning Articles 6 (labour inspection), 10 (comfortable and steady temperature), 14 (sufficient and suitable seats) and 18 (protection against noise) of Convention No. 120, which responds to its previous request.

Safety and Health in Construction Convention, 1988 (No. 167)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous requests concerning Articles 34 (reporting on occupational accidents and diseases)and 35(b) (labour inspection services) of Convention No. 167, which responds to its previous request.

Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous requests concerning Articles 3 (policy on safety and health in mines), 5(2)(d) (compilation and publication of statistics on accidents, occupational diseases and dangerous occurrences), 5(4)(a) (mine rescue, first aid and appropriate medical facilities), 5(4)(b) (adequate self-rescue respiratory devices), 5(4)(c) (securing abandoned mine workings), 5(4)(d) (safe storage, transportation and disposal of hazardous substances and waste), 7(b) (safe commissioning, maintenance and decommissioning of mines), 7(c) (measures to maintain ground stability), 7(d) (provision of two exits), 7(g) (operation plan and procedures for a safe system of work), 7(i) (stopping operations and evacuation of workers), 10(b) (supervision of mine work), 10(d) (investigation and report on accidents and dangerous occurrences), 13(1)(f) (selecting OSH representatives), 13(4) (protection against discrimination and retaliation) of Convention No. 176, which responds to its previous request.

Article 10(c) of the Convention. Recording system of the names and probable location of all persons who are underground. The Committee notes that section 23 of the Government Decree on the Safety of Blasting and Excavation Work (644/2011), as amended, requires the provision of a communication and warning system between supervisors and employees that can enable verification of the location of an employee. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on measures taken to give effect to Article 10(c) in situations other than demolition or blasting work.

Article 13(1)(a) and (b) and 13(3). Rights of workers under national laws and regulations. The Committee notes section 19 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (738/2002), as amended, which provides a notification obligation for workers to the employer and the OSH representative without delay of any faults and defects discovered in working conditions or working methods, machinery, other work equipment, personal protective equipment or other devices that may cause risk or hazard to the safety or health of employees. The Committee also takes due note of the Government’s statement that, while there are no specific provisions on reporting to authorities, it is normal practice and the starting point for people to communicate with the authorities, even in their capacity as an employee. The Committee nevertheless recalls that, under Article 13(1) and (3), the procedures for the exercise of the right of workers to report accidents, dangerous occurrences and hazards to the competent authority, and their right to request and obtain, where there is cause for concern on safety and health grounds, inspections and investigations to be conducted by the competent authority, shall be specified by national laws and regulations. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate the measures envisaged, including any legislative amendments, to give full effect to Article 13(1)(a) and (b) of the Convention.

Article 13(2)(c). Right of safety and health representatives to have recourse to advisers and independent experts. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that, in accordance with national laws and regulations, safety and health representatives have the right to have recourse to advisers and independent experts.

Safety and Health in Agriculture Convention, 2001 (No. 184)

Article 4 of the Convention. Coherent national policy. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that no strategies have been prepared yet for specific sectors in Finland. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether it envisages taking measures to adopt a strategy for the agricultural sector, after consultation with the social partners.

Article 5. Labour inspection in agriculture. The Committee refers the Government to its comments adopted in 2022 under the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129).

Article 19(b). Minimum accommodation standards. The Committee notes the concerns of the SAK in its observations under the Convention, indicating that, because regulations governing accommodation are enforced by several public authorities, no single agency bears primary responsibility. The SAK indicates that employees housed in facilities provided by the employer have reported miserable conditions. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure the enforcement of accommodation standards for agricultural workers.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes the observations of the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK), communicated with the Government’s report.

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report on the effect given to Article 6(c) of the Convention concerning appropriate inspection services for the purpose of supervising the application of the Convention.

Articles 1(1) and (3) and 6(a) of the Convention. List of carcinogenic substances and agents. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the tripartite Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety Regulations is about to begin work on a legislative reform, modifying the legislation so that the new decree would include provisions on the obligation to register all of the chemicals with a hazard statement indicating carcinogenic potential, as defined in the EU Regulation on Classification, Labelling and Packaging (No. 1272/2008). It also notes the indication that other substances and agents not listed in EU Regulation No. 1272/2008 would be separately listed in the decree. Furthermore, the Committee notes the indication of the SAK that the list of carcinogenic substances and agents which must be reported to the register for workers at risk of exposure to carcinogenic substances and processes (the ASA register) should be updated by including workers exposed to certain substances, including formaldehyde and crystalline silica. The Government indicates, in reply, that the exposure agents referred to by the SAK would mostly be covered by hazard statements, and that other necessary measures would be taken into account during the preparation of the decree. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on developments concerning the legislative reform on the obligation to register hazardous chemicals and substances and to continue to provide information on the manner in which the observations of the SAK are taken into account in the process.

Article 2. Replacement of carcinogenic substances and agents by non-carcinogenic or less carcinogenic substances and agents. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the decreasing number of workers exposed to carcinogenic substances between 2007 and 2012, including environmental tobacco smoke (from 6,986 to 69), asbestos (from 1,298 to 1,022) and ethylene thiourea (from 51 to 4), and that the quantity of formaldehyde manufactured or imported to Finland has decreased from 57,000 tonnes in 2007 to 33,000 tonnes in 2014. The Committee also notes that according to the SAK, more work is necessary to decrease the exposure of workers and replace harmful substances with less harmful ones. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to replace carcinogenic substances and agents by non-carcinogenic or less carcinogenic substances and agents and to decrease the exposure of workers to such substances.

Article 3. Protection of workers and registration of workers exposed to carcinogenic substances and agents. The Committee notes that in response to the concerns expressed by the SAK in 2010, the Government indicates that regardless of their form of employment, workers who have been exposed to carcinogenic substances should be registered in the ASA register, that employers must organize statutory occupational health care and that inspectors monitor employers’ compliance with these obligations. The Committee also notes the indication that periodic medical examinations are not a prerequisite for receiving compensation for an occupational illness and that pursuant to section 3 of the Occupational Diseases Act (No. 1343/1988), employers are liable for providing compensation when the work performed in their service might have last caused the illness, regardless of whether periodic medical examinations were conducted or not. Furthermore, the Committee notes the indication of the SAK that doubts remain as to whether every workplace is aware of the procedure to report the workers exposed to carcinogenic agents to the ASA register and that occupational hygiene measurements to gather information on exposure agents are only conducted in some workplaces, which can cause problems later on for ill workers claiming compensation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to respond to the issues raised in the observations of the SAK as regards the reporting of workers exposed to carcinogenic substances and agents to the ASA register, and conducting occupational hygiene measurements in workplaces.

Application in practice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that the number of workers added to the ASA register, which steadily decreased from 23,551 in 2007 to 16,063 in 2010, has increased to 16,854 in 2012. It also notes that, in the course of 408 inspections relating to employers’ reporting obligation to the ASA register, 140 employers were given written advice to improve the situation, improvement notices were issued in six cases and one case was transferred to the authorities for decision. Furthermore, the Committee notes the specific information on inspections conducted in relation to workers’ exposure to asbestos and tobacco smoke. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide relevant statistical information on the application of the Convention in practice, including information on the number and nature of the contraventions reported, the number, nature and cause of cases of disease, etc.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes the information provided, including reference to legislative developments since the last report. The Committee further notes the comments from the Central Organisation of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) and the Finnish Construction Trade Union, included in the Government’s report.

Article 1(1) and (3) of the Convention. List of carcinogenic substances and agents. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information that Finnish legislation on the prevention of work-related cancer risks covers only categories 1 and 2 of the EU classification of carcinogenic substances and agents, but not those attended by less evidence of the cancer risks they pose to humans; that the scope of Finnish legislation and responsibility to register also covers exposure to agents classified as carcinogenic by the EU, such as environmental tobacco smoke and hardwood dust; that legislation on occupational disease compensation covers for example the risk of lung cancer caused by crystalline silica, although the EU has not classified this as a carcinogenic substance; that Finland complies with EU legislation on the classification of carcinogenic substances and agents; and that it complies with the interpretation of the carcinogenicity of substances and agents by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). The Committee also notes the comments from SAK that, in their view, ethylene trichloride and formaldehyde should be included in the list of carcinogenic substances, that the Finnish Construction Trade Union considers that creosote and mould should be viewed in the same way as asbestos, and that quartz dust should be included in the list of carcinogenic substances and agents. Noting that the Government does not address the SAK comments in its report, the Committee asks the Government to respond thereto in its next report.

Article 2. Carcinogenic substances and agents replaced by non-carcinogenic or less carcinogenic ones. The Committee notes with interest the information for the developments in the period 2002–07 regarding the decreasing number of persons exposed to the following substances: asbestos (from 1,894 to 1,298); tobacco smoke (from 12,317 to 7,047); carbon tetrachloride (from 287 to 66); 1.4-dioxane (from 177 to 83); amitroles (from 112 to three); dieldrin (from 119 to seven); and lindane (from 131 to nine), that the number of persons exposed to vinyl chloride and ethylene oxide have also decreased, that the exclusion of copper-chrome-arsenic salts used in wood preservatives from the EU market in the autumn of 2007 has reduced the number of workers exposed to chrome and arsenic, but that some enterprises use creosote as a wood preservative causing workers to be exposed to poly aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds. The Committee also notes that, in the glass industry, arsenic oxides classified as carcinogenic have been replaced with less carcinogenic antimony compounds. The Committee requests the Government to continue reporting on further developments in this respect.

Article 3. Protection of workers and registration of workers exposed to carcinogenic substances and agents. The Committee notes the information provided regarding the register of workers at risk of exposure to carcinogenic substances and processes (ASA register), and that following the required pre-employment medical examinations, including the provision of information on the potential health hazards in the workplace and on risk prevention, workers exposed to carcinogenic substances for at least 20 days are added to this register. As regards environmental tobacco smoke, the registration criterion is a minimum of 40 workdays per year of exposure. However, workers exposed to unusually high doses of carcinogenic factors in a short period of time as a result of an accident, production error, unusual work process, or other corresponding reason, must always be added to the register. The Committee also notes the statement that, while Finland complies with EU legislation on the classification of carcinogenic substances and agents, and with the interpretation of the carcinogenicity of substances and agents by the IARC, a more restrictive list is used for the purposes of this ASA register, and that a registration system based on the Finnish list would require a multifold commitment in comparison to the current situation and cannot be regarded as providing any corresponding advantages to OSH activity. The Committee further notes the statement of the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health that work-related cancers may be prevented through more efficient steering of risk assessment resources and targeted reduction of exposure in connection with high-risk tasks. The Committee notes the absence of information on how the more restrictive list used for the purposes of the ASA register is developed and the criteria used for selecting the substances and agents the exposure to which will trigger registration. The Committee also notes the issue raised by SAK in that the registration system and organization of statutory occupation health-care services for exposed workers in irregular employment is a concern, because, if statutory periodic medical examinations are not performed, workers are ineligible for compensation. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on how the list of substances relevant for the ASA register is established and to respond to SAK’s concerns in its next report.

Article 6(c). National legislation and labour inspection. The Committee notes that the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health’s occupational safety and health manual for 2010 has been published and that the Department of Occupational Safety and Health is currently preparing a manual for inspectors on the surveillance of chemicals in the workplace. The Committee requests the Government to provide copies of the manual for inspectors once it has been adopted.

Part IV of the report form. Application in practice. The Government notes the brief statistical information provided by the Government concerning the decreasing number of persons added to the ASA register: from 28,028 in 2005 (of which 40 per cent were women) to 23,346 in 2007 (of which 34 per cent were women). The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide relevant statistical information on the application of the Convention in practice.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

1. The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report and the observations of the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK), which were attached thereto.

2. Article 1, paragraphs 1 and 3, of the Convention. List of carcinogenic substances and agents. The Committee notes with interest that the Government continues to expand the compilation of the index of carcinogens, most recently by Ordinance No. 1014 of 4 December 2003 of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, amending Appendix A of Ministry of Labour Decision No. 838 of 1993 on carcinogenic agents at work, adding to the list wood dust of oak or poplar. It also notes that formaldehyde is classified as a carcinogenic substance. With respect to work carried out with asbestos, the Committee refers to its comments under Convention No. 162. With respect to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifications of carcinogenic substances and agents, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that it fully applies the list established by the European Union (European Directive No. 67/548/EEC, Annex I). It provides the explanation that in Finland the determination of carcinogenic substances and agents is linked to the employers’ legal obligation to report for registration all workers exposed to carcinogenic substances and agents. It notes the Government’s statement that due to this it is not practical to register workers exposed to all substances and agents enumerated by the IARC. However, the Committee feels obliged to once again refer to its general comments on the application of Conventions on occupational safety and health that it made in 1997, paragraph 68, that "there is a difference between international standards and regional standards in the approach adopted to occupational safety and health problems and the manner in which they are to be addressed. The incorporation of regional standards into national legislation is not always sufficient to meet the requirements of the international standards of the ILO. States should therefore be reminded that greater attention should be paid to these standards in the revision and formulation of national laws and regulations." The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health has applied the IARC list in assessment projects and that it disseminates this list to workplaces, particularly the information that all substances that are possibly, likely and definitely carcinogenic shall be treated as carcinogens in the workplace. Noting that the list of reference for the application of the present Convention is the list established by the IARC, the Committee requests the Government to indicate measures taken to ensure that the list applicable in the country is brought into conformity with the IARC list of carcinogenic substances and agents.

3. Article 2. Carcinogenic substances and agents replaced by non-carcinogenic or less carcinogenic ones. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of the Ordinance of the Council of States on chemical agents in the workplace (Ordinance No. 717 of 2001), replacing the Council of States’ Decision No. 920 of 1992. It notes in particular section 9 ensuring the employers’ obligation either to eliminate or minimize the dangers or risks that chemical substances present for workers and to limit workers’ exposure thereto as far as it is technically possible, in accordance with the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide with its next report examples of chemical substances that have been effectively replaced by non-carcinogenic or less carcinogenic ones, as well as details regarding the manner in which this has been done.

4. Article 3. Registration of workers exposed to carcinogenic substances and agents. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of the Act on registers of workers occupationally exposed to carcinogenic substances and processes, Act No. 717 of 17 August 2001, replacing Act No. 1038 of 1993. It notes that employers now also have to provide information with respect to the recorded levels of exposure workers have been subject to (section 2(5)) and that this information shall be kept for a period of 80 years (section 5). With respect to recording information in the ASA register on the exposure of workers employed on short-term contracts - a question raised by SAK both previously and in its observations attached to the Government’s most recent report - the Committee notes that the Government considered that it may be justified to record information on workers in short-term employment, if the period of exposure exceeds 40 days but that it would be problematic to determine such a period of exposure if the worker would be employed under several employment contracts and at different workplaces. The Committee notes SAK’s concerns regarding the application of these rules in practice and that according to a report by the labour market parties, the occupational safety and health protection of workers in atypical employment relationships - such as temporary workers and part-time workers - is insufficient - in particular as regards the exposure to asbestos. The Committee requests the Government to respond in its next report to the concerns raised by SAK and to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to ensure that appropriate information regarding all workers’ exposure to carcinogenic substances and agents is duly recorded.

5. Article 6, paragraph (c). National legislation and labour inspection. The Committee notes with interest the numerous amendments to the current occupational safety and health legislation, particularly the adoption of Occupational Health Care Act No. 1383 of 21 December 2001 and Occupational Safety and Health Act No. 738 of 23 August 2002. It notes in this respect the observations submitted by SAK concerning the Occupational Safety and Health Inspectorate’s chemical expertise and the resources available for monitoring. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that it is in the process of adopting new guidelines on how to carry out health inspections. The Committee hopes that the Government will take into account the concerns of SAK when adopting the new guidelines for labour inspections and requests the Government to provide copies of these guidelines once they have been adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee takes note of the comprehensive report provided by the Government as well as the information supplied in reply to its previous comments. It also notes the comments supplied by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK). The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

1. Article 1, paragraphs 1 and 3, of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication on the number of workers exposed to carcinogens, such as quartz dust, wood dust, diesel engine exhaust and formaldehyde, which, however, although classified as carcinogens by the International Agency for Cancer Research (IARC), do not figure on the list of carcinogens contained in Decision No. 838/1993 on carcinogenic agents at work. The Government explains that the substances compiled in the Finnish list follows in the first line the classification of the European Union, which subordinates the chemical substances and agents into different categories and only the chemical agents found in categories 1 and 2 are classified as carcinogenic. Although the European Union takes the estimates of the IARC into account, the list of carcinogens is structured on the grounds of different criteria, which accordingly causes the abovementioned discrepancies between the list established by the European Union and the list of the IARC. However, the Committee notes with interest that the compilation of an index of carcinogens is continuing and that the list has been supplemented the last time by Decree No. 1232 of 18 December 2000 of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health amending section 1 and the appendix of the Ministry of Labour Decision No. 838/1993 on carcinogenic agents at work. Moreover, Decision No. 1059 of 24 November 1999 of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health on a list of dangerous substances contains as well chemicals recently classified as carcinogenic by Finland following the classification of the European Union. The Government further indicates that a working group established under the auspices of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health has submitted a report proposing to add quartz dust to the list of carcinogens because of its proven characteristic to be conducive to the development of lung cancer, although the number of cases of occupational cancer caused by quartz dust is less than eight cases per year in Finland. With regard to the other above enumerated agents, which were classified as carcinogenic by the IARC, the Committee notes that, pursuant to section 3 of Governmental Decree No. 716 of 3 August 2000 on preventing occupational risk of cancer referring to Decision No. 838/1993 of the Minister of Labour which contains a list of carcinogenic agents at work, hardwood dust, which causes cancer of the nose, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, found as ingredients in diesel exhaust fumes, are classified as carcinogenic. Furthermore, tobacco smoke is considered as carcinogenic according to section 2 of Government Decision No. 1153 of 8 December 1999 on environmental tobacco smoke and prevention of related risks of cancer. Moreover, Government Decision No. 1154 of 8 December 1999 amending the appendix to Government Decision No. 1672/1992 on health examinations in jobs involving special risk of occupational disease, introduced a new item 14 adding environmental tobacco smoke to the list of chemical agents causing cancer. However, formaldehyde has not yet been classified as carcinogenic pursuant to the classification of the European Union. The Committee, taking due note of this information, requests the Government to specify the legal basis for determining polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons as carcinogens. It further requests the Government to consider the possibility to base the periodic determination of carcinogenic substances and agents not only on the categorization recognized by the European Union, but also on the indications given by the IACR, in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article of the Convention.

2. Articles 2 and 3. The Committee notes section 1 of Government Decree No. 610 of 21 June 2000 on prohibitions and restrictions concerning carcinogenic, mutagenic and reproduction-toxic agents, which provides for further restrictions of the use of agents conducive to the development of a cancer, notably their prohibition except for research and analysis purposes. With specific regard to chlorinated solvents, the annex to the Government Decision No. 1209 of 18 December 1997 on prohibitions and restrictions concerning certain chlorinated solvents prescribes restrictions of their use. The Committee further notes section 2 of Government Decision No. 1155 of 8 December 1999, amending section 2 of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health Decision on estimating risks to pregnancy and development of the foetus providing for the inclusion of particular factors, such as the mutagenic effects of certain substances, into the risk assessment to be carried out before pregnant women workers are exposed to these substances. In the same way, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health Decision No. 1156 of 8 December 1999 amending the Ministry of Labour Decision on jobs involving risks to young employees prescribes that factors particular harmful to young workers, e.g. mutagenic effects of substances and agents, have to be taken into consideration in the framework of the risk assessment. The Committee notes with interest that section 1 of Decree No. 1028 of 1 December 2000 on concentrations known to be harmful has lowered the existing limits for workers’ exposure to some workplace air carcinogens by referring to the list published as Annexes 1 and 2 of the Safety and Health Notification of the Minister of Social Affairs and Health introducing the human toxicity potential (HTP) values - a calculated index that reflects the potential harm of a unit of chemicals released into the environment used to weight emissions inventories to arrive at a common indicator of harm - for the year 2000. Moreover, section 6 of Government Decree No. 716/2000 on preventing occupational risk of cancer prescribes protective measures to be taken, notably the prohibition to use carcinogenic substances and agents which can be replaced by non- or less carcinogenic ones; the employer’s obligation to use carcinogenic substances, which for technical reasons cannot be replaced, in a closed system and, if that is not feasible, the employer is required to limit workers’ exposure as far as it is technically possible. However, the exposure limits prescribed in Annex A to this Decree must not be exceeded. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that a Decree issued by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health has confirmed a list of carcinogenic agents to which workers’ exposure must be recorded pursuant to section 2 of Act No. 1038 of 26 November 1993 requiring the employer to register the workers exposed to carcinogenic substances and methods at their workplace. Noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to specify the abovementioned Decree and to supply a copy for further examination. With regard to work involving workers’ exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, section 2 of Government Decision No. 1153/1999 on environmental tobacco smoke and prevention of the related risk of cancer, effective since 1 July 2000, requires the employer to carry out a risk assessment with a view to the nature, quantity and duration of exposure in order to estimate the risks for workers’ safety and health. On the grounds of the results of this risk assessment, the employer is obliged to take appropriate measures to protect the workers by reducing the degree of exposure, its duration as much as reasonably and technically possible and by introducing protective concepts as the working facilities allow. As to workers with a higher risk factor, notably pregnant women, section 3, subsection 2, of the said Decision prohibits the assignment of pregnant women to work involving exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. In addition, the employer is obliged, upon request, to show to the labour protection authorities the risk assessment carried out, including the data on which the risk assessment is founded, and the measures taken to reduce the workers’ exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Moreover, the employer must provide information as to the manner in which the implementation of these measures is monitored at the workplace. Moreover, section 10 of Government Decision No. 1153/1999 requires the employer to keep a record of the workers who are exposed for a significant proportion of their working time, that is a minimum period of 40 workdays, in order to determine their annual exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. In this context, the Committee notes the comments provided by the SAK arguing that the legislative process of drafting the Act on the register of workers exposed to carcinogenic substances as well as the preparative work of the legislation concerning the listing of carcinogenic substances and products and workers’ exposure did not lead to an agreed solution with regard to the shortcomings observed in practice, in particular the collection of data on occupational exposure of temporary workers who have uninterrupted short-term employment periods, however, with different employers. In these cases, the employers do not enter in a satisfactory way the exposure data in the register on the exposure of workers occupationally exposed to carcinogens (ASA Register). Therefore the data contained therein are not reliable. This is demonstrated by means of section 11 of Government Decision No. 1153/1999 on environmental tobacco smoke, according to which only exposure data workers exposed for more than 40 days must be entered in the register. Due to a lack of exchange of information between the different employers of these short-term workers, their data are left outside the ASA Register, although they should be included in the ASA Register, because the workers concerned in fact have been exposed for at least 40 workdays to environmental tobacco smoke during a number of different employment periods under short-term contracts. The Committee, taking due note of the information provided by the Government as well as of the position of SAK, requests the Government to consider measures to guarantee that exposure data of all workers irrespective of the nature of their working contract are collected in the ASA Register to ensure a system of records containing reliable data, in accordance with the requirements set forth in Article 3 of the Convention. Moreover, it invites the Government to provide information in relation to the comments supplied by the central organization of SAK. As to the ASA Register itself, the Committee notes the Government’s indication contained in its report, that the impact of the ASA Register, being a statutory register of persons exposed to carcinogenic substances since 1979, was studied by sending questionnaires to working units which entered into the register in 1996. The Committee notes with interest that 73 per cent of the units having sent their replies have introduced changes with a view to either eliminate or to reduce significantly the workers’ exposure to carcinogens. The most common changes were the elimination of work causing exposure, the reduction of the volume of carcinogens used, the replacement of carcinogenic substances by others and the use of personal protective equipment. The Government adds that in a number of cases, the ASA Registration was the primary reason for these positive actions. The Committee notes this information with interest and invites the Government to continue to provide information on the impact of the ASA Register in practice.

3. Article 5. The Committee notes with satisfaction section 16 of the Government Decree No. 716/2000 on preventing occupational risk of cancer, which came into force on 1 September 2000, prescribing the employer’s obligation to arrange appropriate health examinations of workers to monitor their state of health, as provided for under the provisions of the Occupational Health Care Act No. 743/1978. Since section 16 of the above Decree requires appropriate health examinations of workers as necessary to avoid the risk of a cancer according to the Act No. 743/1978 on health examinations, workers, who have been previously exposed to carcinogenic substances, e.g. asbestos, benefit of health examinations even after they have changed their employment. The Government further indicates that, since the scope of application of the Government Decree No. 716/2000 covers all kind of work, workers in temporary employment are also covered. With regard to asbestos and, in response to the comments supplied by the Union of Construction Workers, the Government indicates that a research project on asbestos agreed on by the labour market organizations, the authorities and the insurance system jointly is being launched aiming to obtain new information concerning occupational asbestos diagnostics and possibly of supporting lung cancer screening. As to the participants of this project, the Committee understands that the workers examined are previously diagnosed as mild cases of occupational disease and most of them are not entitled to claim handicap benefits so far. Taking due note of this information, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the results of this project. It also requests the Government to reveal the possible influence of the results of this study on the worker’s entitlement to benefits as well as on future legislation. Finally, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the definition of the term "mild occupational disease".

4. Article 6(c) in conjunction with Part IV of the report form. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that, between the years 1980 and 1997, the overall cancer morbidity of persons entered into the ASA Register, thus being occupationally exposed, were on the same level as for the population in general. However, exposed workers have been only observed during an average period of 13.2 years, which in general is a too short period to design a comprehensive picture of the incidence of occupational cancer. In the light of the long latency of cancer, the Committee requests the Government to explain why the observance of workers occupationally exposed were limited to the above-indicated period of time, since as the Government said itself, this relatively short period of time of monitoring does not provide reliable results on the origin of occupational cancer. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that different types of cancer occur according to the substances or agents to which the workers have been exposed. It notes with interest that, since the adoption of the Government Decision No. 920/1992 on the protection of workers from risks related to exposure to chemical agents, the monitoring of risk assessments carried out for workplace chemicals and carcinogenic chemicals has played an increasing role in the inspections of workplaces by the occupational safety and health inspectorates. In this context, the Committee notes with concern that, while a total of 112 cases of cancer of occupational origin were reported in 1999, 109 of them were caused by workers’ exposure to asbestos. However, the number of asbestos deaths reported by the insurance companies in 2000 was declining to 64 cases in relation to 104 cases in 1999.

5. The Committee notes the Government’s indications concerning the CAREX database, which was established with the support from the European Union’s programme named "Europe Against Cancer". The Government explains that this database deals in the first place with those agents classified as carcinogens by the IARC. In this respect, it deals with the number of workers exposed and the exposure data. In that way, CAREX contributes indirectly to the reduction of workers’ exposure by disseminating information to be used in risk evaluation and the measures to be taken in consequence. The Committee noting this information requests the Government to explain more in detail the concept of CAREX and to specify the manner in which the IARC is implied in this programme. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to supply, as an example, a set of data collected since the database CAREX has been set up.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

Referring also to its observation under the Convention the Committee notes the indication by the Government in its report that the Institute of Occupational Health measures exposure to carcinogens in the workplace, provides training for occupational health care personnel on carcinogens, and carries on experimental and epidemiological research in work-related cancer in order to intensify risk assessment and preventive work a data system on carcinogenic exposure (CAREX) which is being built. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the results achieved through this system in particular with a view to reducing to the minimum compatible with safety the number of workers exposed to carcinogenic substances or agents and the duration and degree of such exposure.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

In its previous comments the Committee requested the Government to provide information concerning the practical application of the Convention, in particular as concerns the means for ensuring accurate registration of workers exposed to carcinogenic substances. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report. It also notes the comments by the Central Organisation of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK), the Finnish Confederation of Salaried Employees (STTK), the Union of Finnish Metal Workers and the Union of Construction Workers.

Article 1 of the Convention. The Committe notes that by Decision No. 838/93 the list of carcinogenic substances has been complemented. It notes however the indication in the Government's report that this list differs from that established by the International Agency for Cancer Research (IARC) which includes substances such as silica dust, wood dust, diesel exhaust gases and formaldehyde. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether workers are exposed to these substances and agents, and to provide information on measures envisaged or adopted to take account of the latest information available inter alia from the IARC in the periodic determination to be made under this Article of the Convention.

Articles 2, 3, 5 and Part IV of the report form. The Committee takes note of government Decision No. 1182/92 on the prevention of cancer risk at work and in particular sections 19 to 21 thereof, which provide for the keeping by the employer of a list of carcinogenic agents used or present at the workplace and products containing such agents; of workers exposed and , if available, the degree of exposure; the storage of data and a special register (section 19); identification of exposure in general (section 20); and determination of annual exposure (article 21). The Committee notes that according to SAK the register does not cover all persons exposed to a notifiable degree, due to inadequate risk assessment as well as to insuffficient inspection. The Committee also notes the comments by the Finnish Metal Workers Union that workers under short-term employment and those who have been exposed earlier in some other work remain outside the follow-up. The Committee notes the Government's indication in its report that preventive effects of the register (ASA register) are difficult to measure, that cancer morbidity among those reported in the register have been followed experimentally only once, but that it is intended to repeat the follow-up in 1996-97. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the outome of the internal follow-up as well as on the comments by SAK and the Metal Workers Union.

The Committeee notes the information provided by the government in its report that according to the register (ASA register) a total of 14,846 workers in 1,693 work departments were exposed to carcinogenic substances in 1993, 5.4 per cent less than in 1992, the most usual substances being chromic (VI) compounds, nickel and its compounds, asbestos, benzene and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. The Committee also notes that in 1990-93 the Institute of Occupational Health carried out a comprehensive study during which about 3,000 new asbstos-related occupational diseases were identified; 80 to 160 cancers from exposure to asbetos were reported in 1992-94. In 1993 from 164 cancers reported as occupational diseases, 162 were caused by asbestos.

The Committee notes the comments by the Union of Construction Workers that despite the fact that the use of asbestos is prohibited the danger remains for workers engaged in demolition work of old constructions containing asbestos. While work with asbestos is subject to licence and supervision by inspection, 10 to 20 per cent of work involving asbestos is executed without due notification, the risk of occupational cancer deriving from asbestos remaining thus alarmingly high. In addition the trade union considers that methods of early diagnosis and follow-up are not always adequate and that the sick person might be left without treatment or compensation when cancer appears. The Committee also notes the comments by STTK that there have been a few cases in which the investigation of causes of a suspected cancer have been inadequate.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to reduce to the minimum compatible with safety the number of workers exposed to carcinogenic substances or agents and the duration and degree of such exposure, and to ensure that all workers exposed to carcinogenic substances or agents are provided with medical examinations during employment and thereafter. It requests the Government to provide information on the comments by the Union of Construction Workers in relation to exposure of workers to asbestos.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government's latest report and the comment made by the Central Organisation of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) and the Confederation of Salaried Employees (TVK) transmitted by the Government. According to the SAK, the current grounds for the registration of workers exposed to carcinogenic substances is insufficient and inspections carried out by the labour protection authorities should be intensified. The Committee notes from the Government's report that a register is kept of persons exposed to carcinogenic substances by virtue of sections 10 and 11 of the Council of State Decision 583/85 concerning protection against the risk of cancer at work. Section 10 of Decision 583/85 further provides that the directorate of worker protection is responsible for ensuring that information concerning carcinogenic substances and the workers exposed to these substances is kept in a register. The Committee recalls that Article 3 of the Convention calls for the establishment of an appropriate system of records in respect of carcinogenic substances and, under Article 6(c), appropriate inspection services shall be provided for the purpose of supervising the application of the Convention. It would point out that Paragraph 15(2) of the Occupational Cancer Recommendation suggests that, in establishing a system of records, account should be taken of the assistance which may be provided by international and national organisations, including organisations of employers and workers. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report concerning the practical application of the Convention as requested under point IV of the report form, in particular as concerns the means for ensuring accurate registration of workers exposed to carcinogenic substances.