Health and safety effect of worker participation examined

A study published in late 2003 finds that the presence and effective operation of works councils has positive effects on working conditions in Dutch organisations. This article highlights the main findings of the research into the occupational health and safety impact of worker participation.

In 1996, the Dutch government launched a 'reorientation' of its occupational health and safety (OHS) policy and of the Working Conditions Act (Arbowet), which was amended in 1998 (NL9812112F). The aim was a decentralisation of the focus of OHS policy from state regulation to 'self-regulation' at company level. The main assumption implicit in this government strategy was that increased freedom of manoeuvre at company level would enhance OHS initiative on the part of employers. 'Mobilisation of the expertise of employees is an important prerequisite for good OHS policy. Active involvement of employees is a qualitative stimulus and also secures a balance between the interests of employers and employees', according to the government. In the Dutch setting, employee involvement in OHS policy mainly implied the involvement of works councils (ondernemingsraden) (NL0309102T). The government contended that the increased importance of worker participation in this area did not imply that the position of the works council in the field of OHS matters needed to be strengthened: 'In general, the position of the works council in both the Works Councils Act and the Working Conditions Act may be deemed adequate.'

A recent research project (Het arbo-effect van medezeggenschap[The OHS impact of worker participation], Jan Popma, Deventer, Kluwer, October 2003) examines some of the assumptions of the reform of the late 1990s, asking two main questions:

• does worker participation, especially by works councils, lead to better working conditions? and

• are works councils sufficiently equipped to fulfil successfully their assigned role in the field of OHS?

The main points of the study, based on a survey of works councils, are summarised below.

Reorientation of policy

At the end of the 19th century and during most of the 20th century, a continuing stream of state regulations was issued in the field of OHS, enforced by a public authority - the Labour Inspectorate (Arbeidsinspectie). From the 1970s, however, doubt was cast on the effectiveness of state regulation. This resulted in a shift in OHS policy, away from so-called 'command and control' interventionism towards self-regulation. Subsequent legislation imposed a general duty of care upon employers, and also a duty to outline an OHS policy. Furthermore, the Working Conditions Act gave participation rights to workers (notably via the works council).

Despite some amendments to the Working Conditions Act since 1980 (such as an obligation to carry out a risk assessment and the introduction of OHS services in 1994), this framework of a general duty of care on the employer’s side and worker participation on the other side still holds today. Both parties are deemed jointly to develop a policy to protect health and safety at work.

Statutory position of works councils

At present, the range of statutory powers of the works council in the field of OHS is quite broad.

• a right to consultation in general and specific consultative rights in the field of OHS;

• a general right to information in all fields and specific rights in the field of OHS;

• a general right to make proposals;

• various facilities, such as time off work and a right to specific training;

• a right to set up an OHS commission;

• legal protection for members against specific disadvantages (notably dismissal);

• a right of 'approval' concerning specific decisions in the field of OHS (such as a contract with an OHS service);

• advisory powers pertaining to economic and strategic policy, that may also serve to mitigate (negative) OHS side-effects of these policies; and

• a right to consult the Labour Inspectorate.

Use of statutory powers

The research finds that even if works councils are well endowed with statutory powers in the OHS field, in practice they do not always succeed in using them. The most basic rights - the right to be consulted and the right to information - are, it is claimed, observed properly: in 86% of all companies surveyed the works council is consulted regularly and in 82% the flow of information is labelled 'adequate'. Nevertheless, it is found that over 10% of all works councils are denied even these most basic rights (while some 15% of all companies obliged to set up a works council - ie those with over 50 employees - do not have one in place). The most eminent right in the field of OHS, the right of approval, is often not observed. In only 37% of companies examined is the right of approval respected flawlessly, the research finds, while in 39% of companies, the works council is passed over systematically. Moreover, analysis indicates that most works councils do not even notice that their rights in this field are being violated and, if they do notice it, they rarely stand up to the employer.

Over a period of two years, only one out of every eight works councils surveyed had made use of their right to make proposals on OHS matters. One of the main explanations is that 92% of respondents in the survey stated that the works council is overburdened and lacks time (61%). Also, many works councils lack specific expertise in the field of OHS (and this expertise has not risen in comparison with a 1986 survey among works councils). Finally, some 50% of all works councils hardly ever have contact with the Labour Inspectorate. The labour inspectors, for their part, do not think very highly of the performance of works councils in this area: only around 60% of works councils are deemed to be knowledgeable (with no more than 10% performing 'well'). However, 46% of all responding inspectors stated that most of the time the works council may be considered a useful partner. Only 11% of all inspectors state that the works council does not contribute to OHS at all.

Three background factors are found to play an important role. First, works councils that are prepared to take a more activist stance appear to be taken more seriously by their employer, in that they are less likely to be passed over and receive better information. This also goes for works councils that maintain relatively close contact with trade unions. However, this more union-oriented type of works council constitutes only a small minority. Second, worker participation through works councils is clearly more effective in larger firms. Third, the effectiveness of worker participation in OHS is very much dependent on management style and the employer's attitude towards participation. If the employer is sceptical or even 'condescending' about participation, the works council will be 'empty handed'.

The OHS effect of worker participation

Since 1998, the Labour Inspectorate has carried out an annual 'OHS Monitor' among some 1,600 companies in order to assess the current state of health and safety and OHS policy in the Netherlands.

The findings of the OHS Monitor indicate that there is a clear connection between the presence of a works council on the one hand and the presence and quality of both risk assessment and a plan of action on the other hand. One out of every five companies (with 50 employees) that have not installed a works council have also failed to carry out a risk assessment. In companies that do have a works council, this rate is only 6%. With regard to the presence of a plan of action, the difference is not significant. Plans of action that have not been discussed with the works council, however, are of a significantly poorer quality (according to the labour inspectors). Further, the quality of both OHS instruments increases with the frequency of consultation and the influence of the works council. OHS services too seem to benefit from the influence of the works council. The scope of their contract with an OHS service is significantly more encompassing in companies with a works council than in their counterparts without worker representation. Also, the focus is more on preventive activities instead of merely on employees' absence from work. Findings from another survey also indicate that the impact of OHS services is stronger in companies in which the works council had been involved in contracting the OHS service.

As for actual working conditions, the presence of a works council seems to be beneficial. Companies in which OHS is a recurrent theme of consultation have clearly more often taken measures to reduce risks (93%) than companies that hardly ever discuss OHS matters with the works council (78%). Also, the measures are embedded more thoroughly in the former companies (84%) than in the latter (49%).

A third indicator of the positive effect of worker participation may be that in companies in which the works council has not been involved in the process of contracting an OHS service absence from work is at a higher level. Absence from work appears to correlate significantly with the type of OHS policy, and the works council may to some extent influence the type of policy of both the OHS service and of the employer.

Commentary

To sum up, it is beyond dispute that the involvement of works councils in the field of OHS has a positive effect - albeit a marginal one, especially in companies that have already put in place a professional OHS infrastructure (notably in the form of an OHS coordinator). In many companies, however, doubts may be cast on the effectiveness of worker participation. One remedy could be to oblige companies with over 20 workers to organise some sort of expertise in the form of internal OHS services or safety experts. Well-trained professionals at the shopfloor level may be expected to boost both attention to OHS matters and effectiveness in OHS policy. On the other hand, leaving OHS solely to professionals has its disadvantages. Professionalisation entails the risk of one-sidedness, and of an OHS policy in which shopfloor experience is not taken into account. Therefore, it might be wise to allot an active role to the workers' representatives. So-called invisible OHS risks such as stress, organisational culture and so on may best be brought to the attention of the OHS service by those who are trusted by their co-workers. (Jan Popma)