Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

Working Environment (Air Pollution, Noise and Vibration) Convention, 1977 (No. 148) - Spain (Ratification: 1980)

The Committee notes with interest the information supplied in the Government's report in reply to its previous observation, in particular, as concerns Article 8, paragraph 3, and Article 9 of the Convention. It further notes the comments made by the General Union of Workers (UGT) transmitted with the Government's report. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the following points:

Article 1, paragraph 1. The Committee notes the comments made by the UGT that Royal Decree No. 1316/1989 of 27 October concerning the protection of workers from risks due to occupational exposure to noise does not apply to civil servants and independent workers. It understands, however, by virtue of section 1, that the Decree applies to all workers whatever the type of contract, with the exception of aviation and maritime crews. Since the provisions of this Convention are applicable to all branches of economic activity by virtue of Article 1, paragraph 1, the Government is requested to indicate whether civil servants are indeed covered by the Decree and, if not, to indicate the measures taken to ensure the protection of their health from the harmful effects of exposure to noise. The Government is also requested to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to ensure the protection afforded by the Convention to aviation and maritime crews.

Article 8, paragraph 1. 1. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the adoption of Royal Decree No. 1316/1989. It further notes the statement made by the UGT that section 4, paragraph 2 of the Decree permits employers who consider that the noise level at the workplace does not surpass 80dBA and 140dB to be exempted from the obligation to measure noise levels. The Committee understands that section 3 of the Decree requires periodic evaluations (at least every three years) of work posts where the daily level of exposure exceeds 80dBA and annual evaluations are to be undertaken where the level exceeds 85dBA. In this regard, workers have the right to be present while such evaluations are undertaken and to be informed of the results and the preventive measures taken. The employers who may be exempted from the obligation to measure exposure levels under section 4, paragraph 2, must consider that exposure levels are largely below 80dBA and 140dB.

The Committee would call the Government's attention to section 7.1 of the ILO Code of Practice on Protection of Workers against Noise and Vibration in the Working Environment which provides that the level of noise in the working environment should be measured whenever: (a) the work undertaken or the workplace is likely to carry a risk of noise; (b) the monitoring of the workplace, of the workers' health, or inspection visits demonstrate that the risk might exist or; (c) the workers feel that they are exposed to levels of noise which bother them or their work. The Government is requested to indicate the measures taken to ensure that the choice to measure the levels of noise exposure in the working environment rests not only with the employer, but may be invoked for the reasons given above, and to indicate, in particular, whether the workers may request that measurements be made of the noise levels in the working environment when they consider that such levels are bothersome to themselves or their work.

2. In its previous observation, the Committee noted a comment made by the Trade Union Federation of Workers' Commissions (CC.OO.) that the new legislation concerning the protection of workers against hazards due to noise did not protect workers from hazards other than those directly affecting the hearing. The Committee called the Government's attention to Appendix 2 of the above-mentioned ILO Code of Practice which referred to the physiological, mental and pathological effects of noise and the distinction between the effects on hearing and the effects on other organs of perception and the general effects. In its comment, the UGT has also stated that the Royal Decree No. 1316/1989 does not take into account other effects which might result from exposure to noise. In its latest report, the Government indicates that the provisions of Royal Decree No. 1316 were drafted taking into account all effects of noise exposure and states that section 1 of the Royal Decree refers to the risks resulting from noise exposure and, in particular, the effects on hearing. The Committee further notes that section 2, paragraph 1, of the Royal Decree provides that the level of noise in the workplace should be reduced to the lowest level technically possible. It requests the Government to continue to provide information on any measures taken at the level of the enterprise either on the employers' initiative or upon request by the labour inspectorate to reduce noise levels because of the harmful effects other than upon hearing.

Article 13. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the information provided in the Government's report. It notes that the draft Act on the prevention of occupational risks based upon EEC Directive No. 89/391 referred to in its previous report is presently the subject of consultation with the social partners and is expected to be adopted shortly. The Government is requested to supply a copy of the text as soon as it is adopted.

Article 14. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the information provided by the Trade Union Federation of Workers' Commissions (CC.OO.) that the budget for the Occupational Safety and Health Institute had been reduced by one-third and the number of personnel of the Institute had been reduced by one-quarter. It notes the indication in the Government's latest report that this reduction has not affected the effectiveness of the Institute since, to the contrary, other factors concerning resource management have permitted a significant improvement in the effectiveness of preventive action without increasing the number of staff. The Government adds that technical and financial resources have not actually been reduced, but have rather been spread out as part of the decentralization process. The Government also refers to a reform which will consider new responsibilities and a more adequate organization of the Institute so that it may better achieve its objectives of inspection in the area of prevention and control of occupational risks. In this regard, the Government is requested to keep the Office informed of the measures taken to restructure the Institute, as well as any other measures adopted to improve the system of inspection in the country.