Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115) - Luxembourg (Ratification: 2008)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

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 together Conventions Nos 115 (radiation), 127 (maximum weight), 148 (air pollution, noise and vibration), 155 (OSH), 161 (occupational health services), 162 (asbestos), 167 (safety and health in construction), 174 (prevention of major industrial accidents), 176 (safety and health in mines) and 184 (safety and health in agriculture) in a single comment.

A. General provisions

1. Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155)

Articles 4 and 7 of the Convention. Periodic review of the national policy and situation regarding occupational safety and health. In response to its previous request, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided information in its report on the measures taken with a view to the periodic review of the national occupational safety and health policy and the holding of tripartite consultations on this subject. The Committee notes in this regard that, under the terms of sections L.324-1 and L.324-2 of the Labour Code, the Higher Occupational Safety and Health Council, which is tripartite, fulfils advisory functions to the ministers with responsibility for health, labour and social security in relation to occupational safety and health. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that the national occupational safety and health policy is reviewed periodically and to provide information on the nature and outcome of the consultations held with the organizations of workers and employers concerned in this respect. It also requests the Government to provide information on the activities of the Higher Occupational Safety and Health Council, including the frequency of its meetings in practice and the OSH issues discussed.

Articles 11(a)–(f) and 15. Obligation of the authorities to ensure that certain functions are progressively carried out to give effect to the national policy. Coordination between the various authorities. The Committee previously noted that the authorities responsible for the enforcement of the laws and requirements concerning safety, health and the working environment (namely the labour and mines inspectorates, the Health Directorate of the Ministry of Health, the Accident Insurance Association, and customs and excise) each fulfil the functions enumerated in Article 11(a)–(f) in their respective fields. The Committee also noted that, under the terms of section L.314-3 of the Labour Code, these institutions are required to coordinate their policies and activities in a coordinating committee for employee occupational safety and health that is to be established by Grand Ducal regulation. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that common projects for the prevention of occupational risks and the protection of safety and health at the workplace are discussed in the coordinating committee for employee occupational safety and health. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the functions of the coordinating committee for employee occupational safety and health in the field of OSH, and on the common prevention projects undertaken by the committee and their results in practice.

2. Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161)

Article 8 of the Convention. Participation of the social partners in the implementation of organizational measures relating to occupational health services. The Committee previously noted that the multisectoral occupational health service is the only service to have a tripartite structure in which employers, workers and their representatives cooperate. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that discussions have been continuing for some time on the establishment of tripartite structures for all the occupational health services, but that no decision has yet been taken in this respect. The Government adds that, according to the tradition in Luxembourg, common decisions, including on occupational health services, are taken in informal tripartite meetings. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged in law and practice to guarantee cooperation between employers, workers and their representatives in the implementation of measures relating to occupational health services.

B. Protection against specific risks

1. Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115)

Article 1 of the Convention. Laws and regulations. The Committee notes the Government’s reference in its report to the adoption of the Grand Ducal Regulation of 1 August 2019 respecting radiation protection, which repeals the Grand Ducal Regulation of 14 December 2000 respecting the protection of the population against the dangers of ionizing radiation. It also notes the adoption of the Act of 28 May 2019 respecting: (1) the health protection of persons against the dangers of exposure to ionizing radiation and the safety of sources of ionizing radiation against malicious acts; (2) the management of radioactive waste, the transport and import of radioactive materials; and (3) amending the Act of 21 November 1980, as amended, on the organization of the Health Department.

Article 2. Application of the Convention to all activities involving exposure of workers to ionizing radiations in the course of their work. Emergency situations. With reference to its previous comments on the circumstances in which exceptional exposure is authorized, the Committee notes that the Government refers to the Act of 28 May 2019, which defines in section 75 “exceptional situations” as being circumstances in which it is necessary to “save lives, prevent serious health effects caused by radiation and prevent the occurrence of catastrophic situations”. The Committee notes with interest that this definition no longer includes “saving valuable equipment”, which addresses its previous request.

Articles 3(1) and 6. Effective protection of workers in the light of the knowledge available. Maximum permissible doses. The Committee previously noted that, under the terms of the previous Grand Ducal Regulations, the dose limits for the lens of the eye were set at 150 mSv a year. The Committee notes with interest that the Government refers to section 11 of the Act of 28 May 2019, which sets the limit for the equivalent dose for the lens of the eye at 20 mSv a year, in conformity with the recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). The Committee notes this information, which addresses its previous request.

Article 14. Discontinuation of assignment to work involving exposure to ionizing radiation pursuant to medical advice and alternative employment. With reference to its previous comments on the situation of workers who can no longer perform work involving exposure to ionizing radiation, the Committee notes once again that no information has been provided concerning the measures proposed to provide workers with alternative employment or other means of maintaining their income. In this regard, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to paragraph 40 of its 2015 general observation which indicates that employers should make all reasonable efforts to provide workers with suitable alternative employment in circumstances in which it has been determined that workers, for health reasons, may no longer continue in employment in which they are, or could be, subject to occupational exposure. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged relating to assignment to suitable alternative employment in circumstances in which it has been determined that the workers concerned, for health reasons, may no longer continue to be employed in work by reason of which they could be subject to occupational exposure.

2. Maximum Weight Convention, 1967 (No. 127)

Articles 5 and 8 of the Convention. Training of workers assigned to the manual transport of loads. Consultation with the social partners. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that consultations are held between occupational health services and employees engaged in the manual transport of loads and that the difference in loads between each occupation is taken into account in these consultations. The Government refers to the importance of the national back school in this context and indicates that this school essentially undertakes secondary and tertiary prevention for employees selected by occupational health services and also provides training for trainers in enterprises. The Committee also notes that, according to the Government, there are five professional chambers (the Chambers of employees, of public officials and employees, of agriculture, of commerce and of trades), which have the mission of defending the interests of the occupational groups that they represent, and which are consulted by the Government when it is planned to adopt laws or Grand Ducal regulations relating to the occupational sector that they defend. The Committee notes this information which replies to its previous comments.

Application of the Convention in practice. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the statistical data provided by the Government and compiled by the Multisectoral Occupational Health Service over the past three years. The Committee notes that, of the 246,023 employees covered, 19,279 workers (8 per cent) are engaged in the transport of light loads, 93,248 (38 per cent) middle weight loads and 35,867 (15 per cent) heavy loads. It also notes the number of workers who develop back pain: for light loads, 1,861 workers, of whom 298 suffer from chronic low-back pain; for middle weight loads, 10,953 workers, of whom 1,612 suffer from chronic low-back pain; and for heavy weights, 4,613 workers, of whom 749 suffer from chronic low-back pain. The Committee notes this information and requests the Government to take the necessary measures and to intensify its efforts to reduce to a minimum the number of workers suffering from chronic low-back pain.

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

Application of the Convention in practice. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the extract from the report of the inspection services attached by the Government concerning an inspection undertaken following the limit values for soot being exceeded for certain jobs. The Committee notes this information which replies to its previous comments.

4. Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162)

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government according to which the Health Directorate does not have relevant statistics of occupational diseases caused by asbestos, the number of workers exposed to asbestos during the course of their work or data on the number and nature of violations in relation to the removal of asbestos. The Committee notes in this regard that, according to the 2020 annual report of the Labour and Mines Inspectorate (ITM), 278 violations concerning asbestos were reported in 2020. It also notes that, according to the annual report, 715 cases relating to exposure to and inhalation of asbestos fibres were referred that year to the ITM. The Committee also notes with concern the Government’s indication that the violations reported on sites removing asbestos generally show that 24 per cent do not provide personal protective equipment, 22 per cent do not provide specific training, 31 per cent have not issued a notification and 23 per cent have not carried out an analysis prior to beginning work. With regard to the training of workers exposed to or likely to be exposed to asbestos fibres, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, 1,269 workers have up to now received training to provide them with the necessary knowledge and skills for prevention and safety. The Committee urges the Government to intensify its efforts to collect data on the number of workers exposed to asbestos during their work, the occupational diseases caused by asbestos and the sanctions imposed, and to provide information on the application of the Convention in practice. The Committee also urges the Government to provide information on the measures taken to prevent health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos and to continue providing information on the number and nature of the violations reported, including the measures taken to remedy violations reported on sites removing asbestos.

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

Article 1(3) and (4) of the Convention. Exclusions. The Committee notes that section 1(3), points 5 to 8, of the Act of 28 April 2017 on controlling hazards related to major accidents involving hazardous substances and amending the Act of 10 June 1999, as amended, respecting classified establishments, enumerates exclusions that are not envisaged in Article 1(3) of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on these exclusions and to indicate whether they were decided following consultation with the representative organizations of employers and workers concerned and whether equivalent protection is provided for, as envisaged in Article 1(4) of the Convention.

Application of the Convention in practice. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that statistics and information on the number of workers covered by the measures that give effect to the Convention, and the number and nature of the violations reported, still do not currently exist. Noting the absence of information in this regard, the Committee requests the Government to intensify its efforts to collect information on the number of workers covered by the measures giving effect to the Convention, the number and nature of the violations reported, and the nature and causes of the occupational illnesses and accidents reported, and to provide this information when it becomes available.

C. Protection in specific branches

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

Application of the Convention in practice. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Controls, Worksites and Authorizations (CCA) Service, created in March 2008, has the mandate of reinforcing the promotion of a culture of OSH prevention, awareness and information in the construction sector with a view to the continuous reduction of the number of occupational accidents and diseases. The CCA also carries out controls of working conditions, OSH, the posting of workers and the use of hoisting machinery on temporary or mobile worksites, as well as investigations relating to occupational accidents that occur in all sectors. In this regard, the Committee notes that the number of controls carried out by officials of the CCA Service has increased as follows: from 568 in 2018 to 1,189 in 2019 and 2,048 in 2020. During these controls, some 7,722 violations were reported in 2020, compared with 3,149 in 2019 and 1,064 in 2018. The Committee also notes the nature of the violations reported, and the decisions and measures adopted as a result of the controls. Finally, it notes the information in the 2020 annual report of the ITM, according to which the inspection services reported 161 occupational accidents in the construction sector, or 27.71 per cent of the accidents reported in 2020. The Committee requests the Government to intensify its efforts to reduce the number of occupational accidents in the construction sector. It also requests the Government to continue providing information on the application of the Convention in practice, including the number and nature of the violations reported, the measures taken as a result, the number of sanctions and remedial measures taken, and the number, nature and cause of the employment accidents and occupational diseases reported.

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

Article 16(2) of the Convention. Inspection services and application of the Convention in practice. The Committee notes that the 2020 annual report of the ITM indicates that the Mines, Mining and Quarries (MMC) Service was created at the beginning of 2020. According to the report, the responsibilities of the Service include reporting on the conditions of sites, the full identification of sites, mapping, the determination of methods of surveillance and prevention. On the basis of the problems encountered in practice in relation to the securing of mine openings, the ITM envisages the preparation of new laws and regulations on the subject which also imply the retrocession of mining concessions. The report indicates that two persons are responsible for specific matters relating to the safety of existing mines that are still being exploited or are due to be closed with a view to ensuring the safety of all those called upon to intervene. In light of the creation of this Service, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of the Convention in practice and to indicate the activities undertaken by the MMC since its establishment.

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

Article 9. Safe use of machinery. The Committee notes that, according to the Government’s report, responsibility for the implementation of the provisions of Article 9 lies with the Luxembourg Institute for the Standardization, Accreditation, Safety and Quality of Products and Services. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the legal framework and mandate of this Institute and on the activities undertaken for the implementation of measures relating to the safe use of machinery.

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

General observation of 2015. The Committee would like 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.

Article 2 of the Convention. Application of the Convention to all activities involving exposure of workers to ionizing radiations in the course of their work. Emergency situations. The Committee previously noted that under section 5.1.8 of the Grand-Ducal Regulations of 14 December 2000, during an emergency situation, the dose limits may be exceeded for persons exposed at work, including for “saving valuable equipment”. Referring to paragraphs 36 and 37 of its 2015 general observation, the Committee recalls that, in emergency situations, duly informed workers may volunteer to receive a higher dose only in exceptional circumstances. These circumstances, listed in paragraph 37, do not include saving valuable equipment. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take measures to ensure that workers who intervene in an emergency situation are not subjected to exposure exceeding the limit established for the purpose of saving valuable equipment.

Articles 3(1) and 6. Effective protection of workers in the light of knowledge available. Maximum permissible doses. The Committee previously noted that under section 5.1.7(6) of the Grand-Ducal Regulations mentioned above, the effective dose limit for exposed workers, set at 50 mSv a year, may be exceeded in exceptional situations occurring during normal operations, without exceeding the limit of 15 mSv accumulated in the first year. The Committee wishes to draw the attention of the Government to paragraphs 9 and 11, as well as paragraph 32 of its 2015 general observation, which indicate that the limit on the dose is of 20 mSv per year, averaged over five years, with the maximum effective dose not exceeding 50 mSv in any single year. Moreover, the Committee notes that under section 5.1.3(3)(a) of the Grand-Ducal Regulations, the dose limits for the lens of the eye are set at 150 mSv per year. Recalling that, in accordance with Article 6(2) of the Convention, the maximum permissible doses must be kept under constant review in the light of current knowledge, the Committee refers to paragraphs 11 and 13 of its 2015 general observation. It draws the Government’s attention in particular to the recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) which set the equivalent dose for the lens of the eye at 20 mSv per year, averaged over five years, with the further provision that the effective dose should not exceed 50 mSv in any single year. The Committee requests the Government to specify the maximum permissible dose over a period of five years. It also requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to review the maximum dose for the lens of the eye, in the light of current knowledge.

Article 14. Discontinuation of assignment to work involving exposure to ionizing radiation pursuant to medical advice and alternative employment. Referring to its previous comments concerning the situation of workers who can no longer perform work involving exposure to ionizing radiation, the Committee once again notes that no information has been provided concerning the measures proposed to provide workers with alternative employment or other means of maintaining their income. In this regard, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to paragraph 40 of its 2015 general observation which states that employers should make all reasonable efforts to provide workers with suitable alternative employment in circumstances for which it has been determined that workers, for health reasons, may no longer continue in employment in which they are, or could be, subject to occupational exposure. The Committee invites the Government to provide information on all measures taken or envisaged relating to the assignment to alternative employment in circumstances in which it has been determined that the workers concerned, for health reasons, may no longer continue to be employed in work by reason of which they are or could be subject to occupational exposure.

Application in practice. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied, including extracts from inspection reports and, where such data exist, information on the number of workers covered by the legislation, the number and nature of the violations reported and the number, nature and causes of employment accidents and cases of occupational disease reported.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

The Committee notes the Government’s first report and the Grand-Ducal Regulation of 14 December 2000 concerning the protection of the population against the dangers resulting from ionizing radiations. The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not provide full information on all the Articles of the Convention. Following examination of the above Regulations, the Committee refers to the following points.

Articles 3(1) and 6(1) of the Convention. Effective protection of workers in the light of the available knowledge; maximum permissible doses. The Committee notes that Chapter 5 of the Grand-Ducal Regulations of 14 December 2000 establishes dose limits in conformity with the Convention and current recommendations, with the effective dose limit for exposed workers being set at 10 mSv a year. It also notes that, under the terms of section 5.1.1(1), in exceptional situations occurring during normal operations, when other techniques that do not involve exposure to ionizing radiations cannot be used, a person exposed professionally, following joint written authorization by an approved physician and the radio-protection division, may receive a radiation dose which exceeds the annual limit (10 mSv) without exceeding the limit of 15 mSv accumulated in the first year. With reference to its general observation of 1992 concerning the application of this Convention, and particularly paragraph 11, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that the dose limit of 50 mSv in such exceptional circumstances is in line with international recommendations on condition that the average dose over five years does not exceed 100 mSv, or in other words, if in one year a worker receives a dose of 50 mSv, in the four following years, she or he must not receive more than 50 mSv in total. In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on these dose limits in both law and practice.

Article 13. Emergency situations. The Committee notes that section 5.1.8(2) of the Grand-Ducal Regulations of 14 December 2000 includes, among the criteria used to define an emergency situation in which the dose limits established for persons exposed at work may be exceeded: “saving valuable equipment”. Under the terms of subsection 3, the dose of 50 mSv may not be exceeded, except to save human lives. In such cases, the limit is raised to 250 mSv. The Committee refers to paragraphs 16 to 27 of its general observation of 1992 concerning the application of this Convention, and particularly to paragraphs 25 and 26, according to which, if in an emergency basic human rights such as those protected by the Conventions on freedom of association or the abolition of forced labour can be suspended only to save people’s lives, safety and health, then a Convention such as the Radiation Protection Convention, which itself is to protect the life, safety and health of workers, should tolerate no wider exceptions. In particular, if the effective protection of workers’ health under the Convention is to be suspended for “immediate and urgent remedial work”, that work must be strictly required to meet an acute danger to life and health; exceptional exposure of workers is neither justified for the purpose of rescuing “items of high material value”, nor, more generally, because alternative techniques of intervention, which do not involve such exposure of workers, “would involve an excessive expense”. The Committee requests the Government to take duly into account the above recommendations set out in the general observation of 1992, according to which exceptions to the dose limits in emergency situations must be limited to what is strictly necessary to save human lives, and it requests it to provide information on this subject.

Article 14. Alternative employment or other measures proposed to maintain income where assignment to work involving exposure to ionizing radiations is contrary to medical advice. The Committee notes that no information has been provided concerning the measures proposed to provide workers with alternative employment or other means of maintaining their income, and wishes to draw the Government’s attention to paragraph 32 of the general observation of 1992 on the Convention, which indicates 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 is found to be medically inadvisable. In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to take due account of the recommendation that no worker shall be employed or continue to be employed in work involving exposure to ionizing radiations contrary to medical advice and that, for such workers, every effort is made to provide them with suitable alternative employment or to ensure them the means of maintaining their income, and to provide information on this subject.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in the country, including extracts from inspection reports and, where such data exist, information on the number of workers covered by the legislation, the number and nature of the violations reported and the number, nature and causes of employment accidents and occupational diseases reported.