Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115) - Finland (Ratification: 1978)

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 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

General observation of 2015. The Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to its general observation of 2015 under this Convention, and in particular to the request for information contained in paragraph 30 thereof.

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

Articles 3(1) and 6(1) of the Convention. Effective protection of workers in light of available knowledge; maximum permissible doses. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the SAK’s observations that the dose limits for work-related exposure to radiation defined by the Radiation and Nuclear Authority (STUK) should be stricter on the current research data. The Committee welcomes the Government’s indication in its report that, to implement the new Council Directive 2013/59/EURATOM which establishes new dose limits for the exposure of workers to radiation stricter than the present dose limits in Finland, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health has started the process to comprehensively reform radiation legislation, and that the SAK is involved in the sub-working group which deals with the sections concerning workers. The Committee notes that, in its last observations, the SAK also refers to this legislative reform. The Committee invites the Government, in the process of reforming its radiation legislation, to take into consideration the indications contained in its general observation of 2015. It requests the Government to provide a copy of any new legislation concerning radiation, once adopted.

Article 12. Medical examinations. With reference to its previous comment, where it noted the SAK’s concerns that health inspections are not carried out on all workers, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that under section 33 of Radiation Act 1512/1991, the medical surveillance of category-A workers (that is, workers whose effective dose caused by their work exceed 6 mSv per year) shall be executed by the approved medical practitioner before the radiation work begins and at least once a year in the course of work. The Committee also notes the indication that during the 2010–15 period, the STUK observed two instances where the health surveillance of a category-A radiation worker was neglected and consequently issued a corrective order. The Government states that the STUK has not observed the manifestation of such negligence especially among short-term workers but that it will pay more attention to this issue in its future inspections. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that Council Directive 2013/59/EURATOM contains provisions on the protection of outside workers. The Committee takes note of this information.

Article 14. Discontinuation of assignment to work involving exposure to ionizing radiation pursuant to medical advice and alternative employment. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its request for information, that occupational health care experts monitor the health of workers exposed to radiation and, when necessary due to health reasons, recommend stopping the exposure. If the employer is unable to offer alternative employment to the worker, the accident insurance company can provide compensation for the costs of vocational rehabilitation or, if rehabilitation is not an option, due to for example age or other illnesses limiting a person, there is a possibility for the worker to be provided with a disability pension. The Committee takes note of this information.

Application in practice. With reference to its previous comments where it noted the indication of the SAK that the occupational health-care provisions are not supervised and no statistics are available on the implementation of statutory health inspections, the Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government according to which occupational health and statutory medical examinations are supervised through occupational safety inspections, whose guidelines provide that if the employer has neglected to arrange medical examinations in work that presents a special risk of illness, the inspector issues an improvement notice to the workplace. The Committee also notes that according to the Social Insurance Institution of Finland, an average of one million occupational medical examinations are performed annually and that 17 per cent of examinations in 2011 and 20 per cent in 2012 were performed because of a special risk of illness.

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

The Committee notes the information provided regarding effect given to Article 7(1)(b) and (2) of the Convention, and references made to new legislation adopted giving further effect to the Convention, as well as the detailed information provided regarding regulatory guides for different types of work involving possible exposure to radiation. The Committee further notes the observations from the Central Organisation of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) included in the Government’s report.

Articles 3(1) and 6(1) of the Convention. Effective protection of workers in the light of available knowledge; maximum permissible doses. The Committee notes from the SAK’s comments that the dose limits for work-related exposure to radiation defined by the Radiation and Nuclear Authority (STUK) should be stricter on the basis of current research data. Noting that the Government does not address these concerns in its report, the Committee asks the Government to respond to the SAK’s comments in its next report.

Article 12. Medical examinations. The Committee notes from the SAK’s comments that health inspections are not carried out on all workers because of the use of temporary and subcontracted workers. Noting that the Government does not address these concerns in its report, the Committee asks the Government to respond to the SAK’s comments in its next report.

Article 14. Alternative employment or other measures offered for maintaining income where continued assignment to work involving exposure is medically inadvisable. The Committee notes the Government’s response that, according to the Employment Accidents Insurance Act (608/1948) compensation for injury or illness covers medical treatment, daily allowances, accident pension and handicap allowance, including any relevant supplements, compensation for costs and loss of income arising from physical therapy. However, with reference to its previous comments the Committee would again like to draw the Government’s attention to what is stated in paragraph 32 of the 1992 general observation under the Convention, and the fact that this provision also relates to situations before any occupational disease has been declared but after a determination that continued assignment to work involving exposure to ionizing radiation has been found to be medically inadvisable. In such cases, paragraph 32 makes it clear that every effort must be made to provide the workers concerned with suitable alternative employment, or to maintain their income through social security measures or otherwise. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on measures taken to ensure that workers are offered alternative employment or to maintain their income when it has been determined that it is medically inadvisable for them to continue their work, including information on the situation of workers who have been employed for less than three years.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee notes from the comments by the SAK that the occupational health-care provisions are not supervised and that no statistics are available on the implementation of statutory health inspections, or on negligence and related sanctions. The Committee requests the Government to indicate measures taken to address the comments raised by the SAK and to provide a general appreciation on the application of the Convention including, for instance, extracts from inspection reports as well as statistical information on the number and outcome of such inspections.

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

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report.

1. Article 7, paragraph 1(b) and paragraph 2, of the Convention. Dose limits. With respect to the maximum annual dose for the lens of the eye of young workers in the age group of 16 to 18 years in the course of their vocational training, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that this dose limit is now three-tenths of the annual dose limit, which is in conformity with the Convention. However, it notes that the references made by the Government to Act No. 418 and Act No. 727 of 2002 amending the Radiation Act (Act No. 592 of 1991) do not concern annual dose limits. Noting that section 4 of the Radiation Ordinance (No. 1512 of 1991) prescribes an annual dose limit of 50 mSv for the lens of the eye for this category of workers, the Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the amending text to section 4 of the Radiation Ordinance (No. 1512 of 1991) with its next report to ensure the full application of the Convention.

2. Article 14. Alternative employment or other measures offered for maintaining income where continued assignment to work involving exposure is medically inadvisable. With respect to job security for those workers who have accumulated an effective dose beyond the occupational exposure limits established in the national legislation and the concern expressed by the Committee previously, it notes the Government’s statement that Chapter 7, sections 3 and 4, of the Employment Contracts Act (Act No. 55 of 2001), enumerate the permissible grounds for dismissal when work has declined considerably or permanently on financial or productivity related reasons and the dismissal shall not precede or follow the hiring of a new employee to a similar task. It notes that similar regulations apply to the public sector (Act No. 750 of 1994 and Act No. 304 of 2003). The Committee notes from the Government’s report under the Employment Service Convention, 1948 (No. 88), that any worker who has been employed for a period of three years and is dismissed for the reasons mentioned above would automatically be covered by the redundancy protection policy. In this context, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to paragraph 32 of the 1992 general observation under the Convention where it is indicated that every effort must be made to provide the workers concerned with suitable alternative employment, or to maintain their income through social security measures or otherwise where continued assignment to work involving exposure to ionizing radiations is found to be medically inadvisable. Against this background, the Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the practical application of this Article including information on the situation of workers who have been employed for less than three years.

3. Part III of the report form. National Authority. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority is currently revising existing guidelines and regulations with respect to workers involved in ionizing radiation work. It also notes the statement that this Authority is also preparing further instructions regarding protection of workers from ionizing radiation. It requests the Government to provide detailed information on measures taken or envisaged by the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority in respect of the protection of workers engaged in ionizing radiation work and to provide copies of any adopted regulations, guidelines and instructions.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

1.  The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report. It also notes the comments formulated by the Confederation of Finnish Industry and Employers (TT), the Employers’ Confederation of Service Industries (LTK), as well as the observations made by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK).

2.  Article 7, paragraphs 1(b) and 2, of the Convention.  The Committee notes with satisfaction section 37 of the Radiation Act, as amended, prohibiting the employment of persons under the age of 18 years in radiation work. The only exclusion from this prohibition is for young persons engaged in radiation work in the course of their vocational training. In this case, the minimum age for admission to radiation work is 16 years. With regard to the maximum dose limits fixed for this category of workers, the Committee notes that section 4 of the Radiation Decree (1512/1991), as amended, fixes the maximum permitted effective dose limit at 6 mSv per year. The annual equivalent dose limits are 50 mSv for the lens of the eye and 150 mSv for any area of the skin. In this respect, the Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to sections 4.1.5 and 4.3.1(b) of the 1986 ILO Code of Practice on Radiation Protection of Workers (Ionizing Radiation) which recommends that workers, apprentices and students under the age of 18 should only be engaged in radiation work which would not expose them to more than three-tenths of the annual dose limits established. The Committee finds that the Finnish legislation is in conformity with these recommendations, except for the dose limit established with regard to the exposure of the lens of the eye. The Committee therefore invites the Government to re-examine this dose limit in order to ensure the full application of this provision of the Convention.

3.  Article 14.  Alternative employment.  The Committee notes with interest section 33(c) of the Radiation Act, as amended, establishing the principle that the dismissal of a worker is not justified on the grounds of an accumulation of radiation exposure exceeding the maximum permissible limit. In this context, the Government indicates that this legal principle does not safeguard the worker from dismissal on grounds of business requirements, e.g. cuts in the production or even total closure. However, these conditions are highly likely to arise after an accident. The Government announces that this gap in the law will be addressed in the framework of the next revision of the pertinent legislation. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to this end in the near future to ensure job security for those workers who have accumulated an effective dose beyond the occupational exposure limits established in the national legislation. It requests the Government to provide information on any progress achieved in this regard.

4.  Part V of the report form.  The Committee notes the Government’s indication to the effect that workers involved in an intervention due to an accident should automatically receive substantial economic or other compensation for any partial or complete disability or death occurring at a later stage and which is caused by excessive exposure to radiation. The Government considers that financial compensation could, in principle, be paid either in the form of an extra salary or by maintaining a sufficiently large fund which is used to pay compensation to those workers or their families who have sacrificed their health, working capacity or life in an emergency situation. The Government concludes that the payment in the form of an extra salary runs contrary to the spirit of the Occupational Safety Act, since in Finland all compensation to be paid for industrial accidents is covered by insurance companies. In this respect, the Committee notes that the amount of compensation in the case of an industrial accident or occupational disease is the same for all workers concerned irrespective of their level of risk. The only extra benefit for radiation workers is the right to radiation leave which, however, was withdrawn in 1998 from employees subject to low levels of exposure, such as X-ray nurses. The level of risk nevertheless affects employers in large companies in the sense that it is more expensive for these employers to take out insurance cover if many cases of accidents or industrial diseases have occurred in their companies. The Committee notes the Government’s reflections on this issue and requests it to provide information on any action taken to improve the protection of workers exposed to radiation, and in general on the practical application of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

Referring to its observation under the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to supply further information on the following points.

1. Article 7, paragraphs 1(b) and 2, of the Convention. The Committee notes that section 37 of the Radiation Act sets the lower age limit for employment in radiation work at 18 years, but allows a younger person to take part in radiation work if such work is found to be necessary for training purposes. It also notes the Government's indication in its report that the Decree on the Protection of Young Employees (508/86) as amended in 1993 (1428/93) still provides that persons under 18 years of age are not allowed to work in jobs where they would be exposed to dangerous ionizing radiations. The Government has not, however, indicated the levels of maximum permissible doses of ionizing radiation fixed in accordance with Article 7, paragraph 1(b), of the Convention for workers under the age of 18 taking part in radiation work for training purposes, nor any provision prohibiting in absolute terms the participation of workers under the age of 16 in work involving ionizing radiation, even for training purposes (Article 7, paragraph 2). The Committee notes from Instruction 3.1 of the Radiation Safety Guide (ST Guide) 1.2, issued by the Finnish Centre for Radiation and Nuclear Safety (STUK) and appended to the Government's report, that STUK will give individual instructions for the dose limits for 16-18 year old persons in professional training, and that the maximum values given in section 5 of the Radiation Decree for persons other than those engaged in radiation work shall be applied to persons younger than 16 years. It appears, however, that the instructions given in the ST Guides are not absolutely binding.

The Government is requested to indicate in its next report the measures taken to ensure the observance of Article 7, paragraphs 1(b) and 2, of the Convention. In this connection, the Committee draws attention also to the dose limits for apprentices and students of age 16 to 18 set in Annex II, paragraph II.6 of the 1994 International Basic Safety Standards for Protection against ionizing Radiation, jointly sponsored by the IAEA, the ILO, the WHO and three other international organizations and based on the 1990 Recommendations of the ICRP.

2. Accident situations.

(a) The Committee notes that under section 7 of the Radiation Decree, "radiation exposure due to measures taken in an accident situation in order to restrict the radiation hazard and bring the radiation source under control" shall not be taken into account in applying the maximum values for radiation exposure under sections 3 to 6.

According to section 7 of the Decree,

Measures needed to restrict the radiation hazard and bring the radiation source under control in an accident situation shall be taken in such a way that the radiation exposure due to the situation is kept as slow as possible. As far as possible, the measures referred to ... shall be taken in such a way that the effective dose of a person participating in them does not exceed 0.5 Sv and the dose at any point on the skin does not exceed 5 Sv.

Referring to the explanations given in paragraphs 16 to 27 and 35(c)(iii) of its 1992 general observation under the Convention, as well as paragraph 225 of the 1990 Recommendations of the ICRP, the Committee considers that the terms "as far as possible" used in section 7, paragraph 2, of the Decree introduce a relative flexibility that is acceptable only for life-saving actions; moreover, the terms "measures needed to restrict the radiation hazard" do not appear to be clearly limited to the emergency phase of an intervention, as distinguished from recovery operations such as decontamination of the site. The Committee hopes that the Government will re-examine sections 7 and 8, paragraphs 1 and 2, of the Radiation Decree, in the light also of paragraphs 233 and 236 of the International Basic Safety Standards for Protection against Ionizing Radiation, referred to in point 1 above, and that it will indicate the measures taken or envisaged to further restrict the exceptional exposure of workers.

(b) The Committee notes that under section 8, paragraph 3, of the Radiation Decree, "A pregnant woman shall not be ordered to take part in measures causing exposure to radiation referred to in this section"; it would thus appear that other workers may be ordered to take part in such measures. Referring to paragraph 234 of the above-mentioned International Basic Safety Standards, the Committee hopes that the Government will adopt provisions to ensure that workers who undertake actions in which the dose may exceed the maximum single-year dose limit shall be volunteers and shall be clearly and comprehensively informed in advance of the health risk involved, and that it will report on the measures taken to this end.

3. The provision of alternative employment. In its observation under the Convention, the Committee has noted with satisfaction the adoption of legislative provisions under which a pregnant woman working in conditions in which the development of the foetus may be endangered by ionizing radiation must if possible, be assigned other suitable work, unless the source of the risk can be eliminated from the work or working conditions. The Committee notes from the Government's report that no similar provisions exist for providing alternative work opportunities not involving exposure to ionizing radiation for workers whose exposure has exceeded the set maximum value. Referring to the explanations given in paragraphs 28 to 33 of its 1992 general observation and the principle reflected in paragraph 96 of the above-mentioned International Basic Safety Standards, the Committee hopes that the Government will re-examine the situation with a view to adopting appropriate measures to ensure effective protection of workers who have accumulated exposure beyond which an unacceptable risk of detriment is to occur and who may thus be faced with the dilemma that protecting their health means losing their employment, and that the Government will report on the measures taken.

4. Referring to point 2 of its observation under the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to supply with its next report information on the measures taken to keep track of outside workers employed by nuclear power plants, their periods of such employment, levels of exposure to ionizing radiation and health status, including any available statistics.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its latest report.

1. Articles 3, paragraph 1, and 6, paragraph 2 of the Convention. Further to its general observation of 1992 under the Convention, the Committee notes with satisfaction the adoption and coming into force of the new Radiation Act (592/91) and Radiation Decree (1512/91) which are based on the 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission for Radiological Protection (ICRP publication No. 60); the new legislation, inter alia, sets forth the principles of licensing, optimization and individual protection related to the use of radiation, has lowered the dose limits for radiation workers and for other persons, with specific dose limits for pregnant workers, in accordance with the ICRP Recommendations, and also covers natural radiation. The Committee likewise notes with satisfaction from the Government's report that, under amendment 1192/90 of the Sickness Insurance Act and amendment 717/91 of the Sickness Insurance Decree (473/63), the Council of State Decision concerning protection against occupational risk of mutagenic and teratogenic damage and of impaired reproduction (1043/91), and the Ministry of Labour Decision on factors posing a risk of mutagenic or teratogenic damage or of impaired reproduction (1044/91), a pregnant woman working in jobs or conditions in which the pregnancy or the development of the foetus may be endangered by a chemical substance, (ionizing) radiation or contagious disease must, if possible, be assigned other suitable work, unless the source of the risk can be eliminated from the work or working conditions. A doctor familiar with the working conditions determines the extent of the risk case by case. If no other work can be assigned, the worker is entitled to special maternity leave for the duration of the pregnancy.

2. In its previous observation the Committee had noted observations made by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) that there were problems with the enforcement of radiation protection legislation with regard to the many outside workers employed by nuclear power plants, particularly for annual maintenance, and that the labour protection delegates and shop stewards did not always receive adequate information about radiation protection. The Committee notes the Government's reply in its report that by virtue of several decisions of the Council of State (i.e. 1672/92 and 743/78), issued in accordance with the Occupational Health Care Act (743/78), all those who may be exposed to ionizing radiation at work are covered by the prescribed health checks, that employers are obliged to give these workers adequate information in regard to occupational health hazards at the workplace, their prevention and the correct working methods, and that under section 6 of the Occupational Health Care Act, the labour protection committee and the labour protection delegate are entitled to obtain from the occupational health care personnel such information obtained by them in their work which is relevant to the health of workers and the promotion of a healthy working environment. The Committee also notes the Government's indication in its report that the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions has stated that the present practice at workplaces is appropriate and that the provisions are being obeyed.

3. The Committee is raising certain questions in a request addressed directly to the Government.

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

I. With reference to its observation, the Committee notes with interest the adoption of the Radiation Protection Act of 1991. It notes that section 2 of this Act provides that, in all operations involving exposure to radiation, the radiation to which an individual is exposed must not exceed the maximum prescribed by ordinance. The Committee further notes from the Government's report that the decree to be issued under the new radiation Act is intended to include provisions on new dose limits. In this regard, the Committee would draw the Government's attention to its General Observation under this Convention which sets forth the new dose limits adopted in 1990 by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (publication No. 60). It hopes that the Ordinance concerning dose limits referred to by the Government will be adopted in the near future and that it will take into account the current scientific knowledge, in accordance with Article 3, paragraph 1 and Article 6, paragraph 2 of the Convention. The Government is requested to provide a copy of any decrees issued under the new Radiation Protection Act as soon as they have been adopted.

II. The Committee notes with interest the information provided in the Government's report in response to its General Observation of 1987 concerning measures to be taken in abnormal situations, such as accidents, where levels of exposure to ionising radiation may exceed the levels prescribed by national legislation for normal conditions. The Committee notes from the Government's report that the Occupational Safety Act of 1988 includes a provision according to which any mutagenic or teratogenic hazards should be taken into account when assessing risk factors caused by working conditions. In this regard, the Committee would call the Government's attention to its General Observation under this Convention, in particular, paragraph 13 concerning dose limits for pregnant women directly engaged in radiation work. The Government is requested to indicate the manner in which mutagenic or teratogenic hazards have been taken into account in determining the risk factors caused by working conditions and whether this has been taken into account in the setting of dose limits for pregnant women. The Government is also requested to indicate the steps taken or being considered in relation to the other matters raised in the conclusions to the General Observation under this Convention.

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

The Committee has taken note of the Government's report and the observations made by the Central Organisation of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) on the application of the Convention, transmitted by the Government without comment.

According to the SAK, there are problems with the supervision of the Radiation Protection Act with regard to nuclear power plants. The SAK indicates that the plants employ many outside workers, particularly for annual maintenance, and that there is a failure to notify these outside workers about radiation doses. The Committee notes that Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention provides that the Convention applies to all activities involving exposure of workers to ionising radiation in the course of their work. Furthermore, Article 9 provides that any information necessary concerning the presence of hazards from ionising radiations and adequate instructions in the precautions to be taken for their protection and the reasons therefor shall be provided to the workers. The Committee notes that section 25 of the Radiation Protection Act provides that only a person with the necessary working skills and competence may install, repair and service radiation-generating appliances. It further notes that, under section 36 of the Act, workers shall receive training and guidance respecting their duties in accordance with the nature of the operations and conditions at the workplace in order to ensure adequate prevention of unnecessary exposure to radiation and the risk of occurrences leading to excessive exposure to radiation. The Government is requested to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that outside workers whose work involves entering establishments in which there are radiation sources, in particular to conduct annual maintenance, are provided with the necessary information and instruction with regard to ionising radiations.

The SAK also indicated that the labour protection delegates and shop stewards do not always receive adequate information about radiation protection. The Government is also requested to indicate the manner in which it is ensured that these workers receive the necessary information and instruction, in accordance with Article 9 of the Convention.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.