Subcontracted workers protest after accident at petrochemicals plant

Download article in original language : ES0310205FES.DOC

In August 2003, eight workers died and several more were seriously injured in an accident at the Repsol-YPF petrochemicals refinery in Puertollano, Spain. The company and the trade unions set up an investigation commission to examine the incident but they disagreed on the final conclusions. Furthermore, a large group of workers employed by subcontractors at the plant claimed that they did not feel represented by the trade unions, and called a three-day work stoppage to demand specific improvements to health and safety at work.

On 14 August 2003, several petroleum tanks exploded causing a major fire at the Repsol-YPF refinery in Puertollano, Castilla-La Mancha. Eight workers died and several more were seriously injured in the accident.

The Repsol petrochemicals group set up the Puertollano plant in Ciudad Real over 40 years ago, and it currently has 920 direct employees, while around 500 more belonging to 50 subcontractor companies also work at the complex. The plant has suffered at least 10 serious accidents in the past 20 years, causing many deaths and injuries. The high accident rate has been a major source of trade union demands and recently the company and the unions agreed to draw up an 'integrated safety plan' in order to increase safety, and reach the target of zero accidents. Little progress appears to have been made in this direction so far.

After the serious accident on 14 August, a joint internal investigation commission was set up to discover the causes of the accident. This commission was made up of representatives of Repsol-YPF, the subcontractor companies and the majority trade unions in the company - the General Workers' Union (Unión General de Trabajadores, UGT), the Trade Union Confederation of Workers’ Commissions (Comisiones Obreras, CC.OO) and the Independent Union (Trabajadores Independientes, CTI). The investigation commission published its technical report on 18 September, but without reaching a consensus on the conclusions. The trade unions preferred to publish a different analysis of the facts because they felt that the report failed to establish the ultimate causes or point the way to improvements in the future.

During the process there was an unexpected response by the workers of the subcontractor companies (almost a third of those working at the plant), who claimed that they did not feel represented on these issues by the majority trade unions and set up a protest platform. As an initial pressure tactic, they called a general work stoppage lasting for three days, after which some of their demands were accepted.

Positions

Repsol-YPF defended its safety policy by claiming that its annual investments in maintenance at the plant are higher than the sector average and those of the leading companies, both in expenditure and in the human resources devoted to it. Also, in its interpretation of the accident, the company claims that a human error led to the formation of a pocket of gas that produced the explosion and the fire. As the company was able to demonstrate, the alarm systems worked correctly but the workers did not pay attention to them and failed to take decisions to remedy and avoid the dangerous situation. Nevertheless, the company also recognises that this may have been due to the excessive attention that the workers were paying to another section of the unit that also had problems.

The CC.OO, UGT and CTI trade unions initially praised the company's willingness to improve safety and pointed to the agreement to draw up an integrated safety plan. However, they accused the company of prioritising production over safety. More specifically, they have said that they do not understand why no preventive measures were taken if dysfunctions in the industrial process were detected for several days before the accident. The unions have also criticised the policy of outsourcing in facilities of this type because they feel that it increases risks and in the long run does not reduce costs. The unions have taken the opportunity to ask the government to stiffen the laws on subcontracting.

The workers of the subcontractor companies expressed their indignation at the accident very forcefully and stated that they do not feel represented by the majority trade unions. Therefore, on 19 August they spontaneously set up a platform to express their complaints and proposals - the Platform of Puertollano Subcontracted Workers ( Plataforma de Trabajadores de Subcontratas de Puertollano). These workers are very concerned about the lack of safety at work, and claim that for years the majority trade unions have failed to obtain satisfactory solutions to their complaints. They claim that the facilities of Repsol-YPF's Puertollano complex are obsolete and poorly maintained. The platform called an indefinite strike to demand specific improvements, such as the same safety systems, training and medical services as apply to the direct workers of Repsol-YPF. On 22 August, the subcontracted workers called off the strike after three days when it was agreed to set up a permanent 'dialogue commission' that includes them, and a working group to make a thorough analysis of the situation at the refinery.

The regional government (the Ministry of Labour of Castilla-La Mancha) has set up another commission to investigate the accident, which has not yet reported. Furthermore, the provincial council of Ciudad Real has claimed that during the firefighting operations there was a serious lack of coordination because the external firefighters could not obtain full information on the plant's internal emergency plan, on the facilities and on the risks they were running.

Decisions taken so far

On 22 August, the dialogue commission was set up with representatives of Repsol-YPF, the subcontractor companies, the trade unions and the Ministry of Labour of Castilla-La Mancha. This commission decided to establish an 'inter-contract health and safety committee', the first such body in Spain, which will monitor the safety of subcontracted workers at the Puertollano plant. The committee will be composed of safety delegates from the subcontractor companies that are continuously present at the plant, with three representing CC.OO and three representing UGT, plus six representatives of the subcontractor companies.

The dialogue commission also decided to improve safety measures at the plant, to demand that the contractors equip their workers properly, and to demand that Repsol-YPF agree to monitor the compliance of the legislation on occupational hazards by these companies.

Commentary

It is striking that a company working with such dangerous materials, and which has made a public commitment to draw up an integrated safety plan, does not appear to have effective measures for detecting incidents and dysfunctions in the industrial process. Judging by the reports that have been published, the company has serious organisational problems. It is also very easy to attribute the accident to human failure, which really means nothing because ultimately practically everything that happens in a built environment like a factory can be attributed to human actions or omissions. Therefore, attributing the accident to a human error is arguably merely a way of distracting attention from possible organisational shortcomings, which are always more complex and more difficult to solve (and more annoying for the management of the company).

Another paradoxical aspect is that, after the accident, the first thing Repsol-YPF did was to set up a joint investigation commission representing the company and the trade unions. In fact, the company should already have a health and safety committee (comité de seguridad y salud) with full responsibility in this area. The creation of this investigation commission may indicate a greater commitment by the company to investigate the accident, but it also places in question the effectiveness and credibility of the health and safety committee, which has serious repercussions for the future. The same can be said of the company's health and safety service. The trade unions could have demanded the permanent reinforcement of the measures that the 1995 Law on the Prevention of Occupational Risks (Ley de Prevención de Riesgos Laborales) established to guarantee health and safety at work.

Finally, the fact that all the dead workers were subcontracted fosters the suspicion that subcontracting plays a major role in the accident rate in Spain (ES0212205F). Nevertheless, the most interesting aspect of this episode is the fact that the subcontracted workers organised themselves to form a platform. Such workers normally find it difficult to organise meetings and claim their labour rights because of their precarious working conditions. The rebellion of the subcontracted workers is a significant warning for the trade unions (and the company) from a group of workers who feel that they are working in dangerous conditions. The subcontracted workers may be making demands that the trade unions are not yet satisfying sufficiently, despite their increasing efforts on health and safety. (Josep Espluga. Department of Sociology, UAB)