MODULE 11
Health and Safety Law in the Developing World
Overview
Embed video centred on page
Embed code: To come
#reveal
button: Transcript
Occupational health and safety legislation is product of the Industrial Revolution. The Industrial
Revolution came first to the “Western World” and was at a later point in time exported to the rest
of the world.
In this module we will discuss some of the factors that impact occupational health and safety
programs in the developing world.
India will be a focus country in this module because of its presence in both the industrialized and the
developing world, because a great deal of information is available in English, because it is a former
colonial state, and lastly, because India is a stable democracy with reasonably transparent
processes and literature sources that can be confirmed.
We will also talk about the International Labour Organization, the ILO. The ILO is a United Nations
affiliate organization. We will discuss the ILO mandate and its influence through its standards, on
worker rights and work-related issues.
/reveal
Learning Objectives
#outcomes
Once you have successfully completed this module, you will be able to:





describe, using simple statistics, the general OH&S picture in the world today
identify some of the factors that can contributes to a gap between the written laws and
actual practices in OH&S
explain and provide examples of the ‘Informal’ sector
describe the situation facing workers in the ‘informal’ sector regarding coverage under
OH&S laws and workers’ compensation programs
identify the mandate of the International Labour Organization
11-1
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
OCHS 2100

describe the purpose of the ILO conventions on occupational health and safety.
/outcomes
Introduction
Thus far in this course, we have explored OH&S programs in Canada, the United States and Great
Britain and touched on programs in the European Union. Countries Asia, Africa, and South America
have not been discussed. While Europe has, as part of “the Western World.” a highly developed and
sophisticated system of OH&S programs, other countries with less developed economies have
extremely basic or even non-existent systems. In some countries, in the latter category, legislation
may exist and not be applied. In other cases, application and eligibility is very restricted to fit the
limited capacity to administer the requirements. And in other cases, multinational companies have
encouraged the establishment of special economic zones where company standards or company
endorsed standards or the standards of the company’s “home” country are applied.
Jukka Takala, in a 2003 article entitled, Indicators of Death, Disability and Disease at Work reports:
“While occupational health and safety law enforcement covers practically 100% in the Nordic
countries, the figure for many developing countries is close to 10% or less, leaving major hazardous
sectors and occupations uncovered, such as agriculture, small-scale enterprises, and the ‘informal’
sector. Often very hazardous sectors, such as fishing, forestry, and construction, are not covered.
The same applies to basic compensation in cases of accidents”.
Research to assess whether or not a country has a developed and sophisticated approach to
occupational health and safety and workers compensation is difficult because of the barrier created
by language. Conversancy with another language, particularly with that of a former European
Colonial power, such as English, then French, then Spanish is an asset.
Much of the information in this module is derived from countries where English is used to
document, at least some of the news, and legislation, guides, pamphlets, and other materials.
Where information is available on OH&S programs, it may or may not be found easily. Sometimes, it
is isolated in segments that defy connection or indicate a contradiction with other information.
Frequently, attempting to assess weight or substance in measuring efficacy or value to the host
country’s society is elusive. And, sometimes information is found in sufficient detail to provide a
comprehensive outline of programs, initiatives, and effectiveness. The difference between the
two extremes is the result of a number of factors that we will explore in this module.
11-2
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
Health and Safety Law Around the World
The Industrial Revolution
In countries studied to this point, the development of mandatory and enforced occupational health
and safety standards and workers’ compensation programs came late in the transition from a craftbased agrarian society to an urban industrialized society. While the industrial revolution set this
change in motion, it was the centralization of industry that resulted in the urbanization of society
which increased the visibility of problems created by these changes. The increasing wealth of society
provided the means to deal with the unwanted consequences of these changes.
The Industrial Revolution marked the first time in history that the living standards of most people in
the world improved. From 1800, during the next 200 years, the population of the world increased
six-fold and income increased ten-fold. Time for leisure or time devoted to not securing a living
increased exponentially. However, the distribution of these changes and wealth was not uniform.
Some parts of our society did not share equally in this new wealth. Some parts of the world still have
economies or part of their economies based on manual labour and draft animals. Widespread
machine-based manufacturing is limited to nations with a high per capita income.
Not surprisingly, considering our own history, it is the extent of industrialization within a nation that
corresponds directly to the sophistication of standards in occupational health and safety and
workers’ compensation.
Index of Fragile States
In 2005, a think tank in the United States, Fund for Peace, developed a list of measurable factors
that enabled 177 countries to be ranked on a number of social, economic, and political issues. Some
countries have insufficient data to be included. Intuitively it would seem safe to conclude that the
absence of data is an indicator of a nation not highly developed or stable. The database consists of
some 130,000 publicly available documents. The list is updated each year and published in the
United States by the magazine, Foreign Policy. The index, taken in totality, provides an indication
and ranking of a country’s ability to provide equality, security, and services to its citizens.
Issues that are considered and measured include such factors as:





The existence of chronic poverty
Refugee flows
Uneven or lack of economic development
The inability or failure of government to provide services
The arbitrary application of law.
While the last two are especially critical, the five taken together provide a strong indication of a
country’s ability — or inability — to serve the interest of all its citizens. The scoring system awards
points for problems so a high score indicates a country at risk.
Nations in Western Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and southern
11-3
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
OCHS 2100
South America score low and are the world’s showcase of sustainability and stability. At the
opposite end of the scale are the 25% of the world’s population who live in the 60 nations that score
very high and are ranked at the top of the ‘at risk’ scale. These are the countries in Central Africa
and Middle and South East Asia. Somalia with, at worst, a non-existent government and, at best, a
non-effective government is the highest ranked. In the Western Hemisphere, Haiti is highest ranked.
For our purposes, the list of factors can serve as a broad indicator of how well a country has
developed and values programs and initiatives dealing with occupational health and safety and
workers’ compensation. Countries with a high ranking rank low in the ability to fund and deliver
government services.
A colour map of the world showing the rankings, Fragile States Index, and additional information can
be found at fsi.fundforpeace.org/
The General Situation
The World Health Organization has estimated that 70% of the global working age population lives in
the developing world and bears the burden of 80% of conditions linked to occupational health and
injury problems. The developing world presents conditions that were common to western countries
50 to 100 years ago.
The highest rates of occupational accidents occur in:
 Agriculture
 Mining
 Construction
 Forestry
Health and safety hazards can include problems relating to:





Hard physical labour coupled with long hours
Poorly maintained or obsolete machinery and equipment
Prolonged exposure to hazardous substances or hazardous concentrations
No or little separation between the work and home environment
Limited or restricted access to health care
Statistics on Conditions in the World
The International Labour Organization has estimated that 4% of global gross domestic product is lost
to workplace injury and disease. In developing countries, incentives to reduce this are not strong —
labour is plentiful, its replacement cost is low, and most, if not all, of the real cost of disablement
11-4
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
Health and Safety Law Around the World
will be borne by the worker and their family.
Major differences between developing and developed countries are:



A much higher proportion of the workforce works in agriculture (70% vs. 10%).
The large presence of the ‘informal’ work force, i.e., those employed outside recognized or
regulated employment such as household unpaid labour, independent service workers such
as street vendors, rickshaw drivers, side walk produce and crafts sellers, and workers doing
piece work at home (60% vs. 5%).
The existence of a migrant work force in many developing countries, about 120 million
globally, that is often poorly protected from workplace hazards and is at much greater risk
of contracting silicosis, asbestosis, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS because often there is no real
separation between the work and living environment (no estimates available).
The International Labour Organization in a 2005 press release estimated at least 2.2 million deaths
each year are related to occupational injury and disease. There is no data available that would allow
an estimate of non-fatal illness and injury. The three leading occupational causes of death are felt to
be chronic obstructive pulmonary disorders (COPD), lung cancers and acute injuries. The data used
to estimate these figures is incomplete because of discrepancies in data criteria and under
reporting. The World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly reported that occupational injury,
illness, and death rates are declining in developed countries but they are level or increasing in
developing countries
Concepts to Consider
The foundation of the model used to manage health and safety in the western world is the transfer
of cost of injuries and illness from the family unit to society at large. In western societies, this ability
developed over many years in tandem with the industrial revolution. Occupational health and safety
develops late in the development of a society.
Although western nations have extensive knowledge of OHS that is openly available, it does not
follow that this information can be applied in developing nations.
Three issues need to be in place to set the stage for the beginnings of effective OHS practices.



The first requisite is a stable government with sufficient infrastructure to establish and
enforce the legislation.
A second requisite is a society that operates in accordance with an accepted system of law,
i.e., all are treated equally.
The third requisite is a government with sufficient funds to establish the operating
structure.
The present-day programs in developed countries are the product of 200 years of society pressuring
government and influencing changes in common law. Developing countries have much less history.
Whereas western countries had the freedom of finding their way, with some pain, developing
countries are usually under pressure to adopt western world values as a price to win foreign aid, be
the beneficiary of outside intervention in developing and managing resources and industry, and
11-5
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
OCHS 2100
participate in international trade.
With the benefit of prior experience, developed nations can and do make information available but
in most cases, it cannot be applied in a large scale because the required infrastructure is not
present. Consequently, we should not be surprised to find that a comparison of systems with the
western world does not lead to a finding of equality.
When assessing the the extent and efficacy of a nation’s health and safety efforts, consider the
following questions:
 In what industries are OHS standards established?
 How are the OHS standards developed?
 How do the standards compare with this of developed nations?
 Are resources adequate to ensure that industries are inspected?
 What occupations are included in a workers compensation system?
India
The Factories Act, 1948
The Act is administered by the Ministry responsible for Labour through its Directorate General
Factory Advice Service & Labour Institutes (DGFASLI) and by the State Governments through their
factory inspectorates. DGFASLI advises the Central and State Governments on administration of the
Factories Act and coordinating the factory inspection services in the States. The Act was amended in
1987 and a 2014 Bill, not yet enacted, contains further amendments but the 1948 Act remains the
principal Act.
The Act applies to factories engaged in a few defined manufacturing sectors, Section 2(k) and the
First Schedule, and that employ 10 or more workers if power is used to manufacture products and
20 or more if no power is used. Section 2(k) and the First Schedule of the Act severely limits the
application of the Act. In general, application of the Act is restricted to manufacturing including
chemical processing, mines, construction and dock work.
The requirements contained in the Factories Act, 1948 are brief. The Act contains twelve chapters.
Three contain requirements dealing with OH&S standards; five deal with administration and
enforcement issues; and four are concerned with wages and working conditions.
The provisions outlining the general responsibilities of the owners and the powers of the inspectors
are similar to what we might see in developed countries.
Section 1(2) states the Act applies to the whole of India. Section 7A (1) requires the employer to
ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare of all workers while they
are at work in the factory. Section 9 outlines provisions that are similar to what has been reviewed
on the authority of the inspector to enter and inspect work premises. Section 92 states that the
maximum penalty for a violation is 100,000 rupees and 2 years in jail. Section 94 increases these
amounts any 50%. Sections dealing with rule making, appeals to orders are also present and the
provisions are similar to what might be seen in western societies.
However, the sections dealing more specifically with health and safety tell a different story.
11-6
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
Health and Safety Law Around the World
Examples, chosen at random, are:







Section 11(1) states that “Every factory shall be kept clean and free from effluvial arising
from any drain, privy or other nuisance, …”
Section 20 provides that spittoons are to be kept in a clean and hygienic condition and no
one may spit in the factory premises other than in the provided spittoons
Section 22 deals with lubricating or adjusting moving machinery without using lockout
procedures.
Section 40-B(1) requires that the employer appoint a person with training in OH&S as a
safety officer when the factory employs more than 1000 workers.
Section 41(G) requires that if a factory works with material considered to be a hazardous
substance, the employer must establish a joint committee. Twenty-nine industries have
been so identified, However, the state government can exempt the factory from this federal
requirement.
Section 41(H) requires that a worker working with hazardous substance can report to the
employer any work activity that presents an imminent hazard; the employer is required to
investigate the situation. If the employer agrees there is hazard, it must remedied and a
report made to the Inspector of Factories. If there is disagreement, the matter is referred to
the Inspector of Factories for a decision. There is no mention of refusing the work.
Section 101 provides that an employer is entitled to the defence of due diligence when
subject to a penalty for non-compliance. The employer can also be relieved of having to pay
a penalty if the employer can establish that another “person committed the offence in
question without his knowledge, consent or connivance.”
Pursuant to the Factories Act, there are separate Acts, Regulations, and Rules for shipping, mining,
construction, petroleum, chemical manufacturing. This additional legislation does not extend the
authority of the Factories Act. It just contains contains more specific requirements.
Additionally, the individual states have the authority to extend application of the Act, exempt
operations that are part of educational institutions and create rules for operations considered to be
dangerous.
The DGFASLI website lists 16 pieces of legislation that in some way deals with occupational health
and safety. The requirements in this legislation are similar to the Factories Act, 1948. An abbreviated
list is as follows:











Models Rules framed under Factories Act
Model Rules: Part 2
The Dock Workers Safety Health and Welfare Act, 1986
The Dock Workers (Safety, Health and Welfare) Regulations
The Mines Act, 1952
Environmental Protection Act
Manufacture Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical (Amendment) Rules, 1999
Building and Other Construction Act
Dangerous Machines (Regulations) Act
Indian Electricity Act
The Petroleum A
11-7
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
OCHS 2100
The Gap Between Laws and Actual Practice
In Great Britain, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is responsible for enforcing health and safety
legislation. The staff numbers about 3500 and serves a population of 62,000,000 (2010 census).
Inspectional jurisdiction is shared with Local Authorities.
In India, the Directorate General, Factory Advice Service and Labor Institutes (DGFASLI) has similar
responsibility. The staff numbers about 210 and serves a population of 1,200,000,000 (2011 census).
Inspectional jurisdiction is shared with State governments. DGFASLI advises state governments on
requirements of the Factories Act, 1948 and the Rules pursuant to the Factories Act and the Dock
Workers Safety, Health and Welfare Act, 1986 and Regulations pursuant to this Act in the major port
facilities.
The mathematics from the numbers available in this paragraph indicates that on a per capita basis,
the HSE in Great Britain has 322 times more staff than DGFASLI. That figure may be somewhat
overstated, or even understated, as we have not fully accounted for what resources India and
Great Britain have made available in the regional districts and States but even so, it would not alter
the conclusion that HSE has vastly more resources for a vastly smaller population.
Even with casual consideration of this information, it is obvious that the inspection and enforcement
activity is both constrained by limited applicability of the Factories Act and the small number of staff
available to police the requirements. Reports from other states confirm that the situation described
above is typical.
As a consequence of the limited applicability, occupational injury and illness data does not reflect
the real numbers or much in the way of numbers. More than 90% of the population is employed in
sectors not covered by, or exempted by, existing legislation on occupational health and safety. In
addition to the exclusion of ‘small’ factories which includes hotels and restaurants, the Act does not
apply to industry to the ‘informal’ sector.
The limited applicability of OH&S legislation is not untypical. In most countries with developing
economies. it is impossible to include the ‘informal’ work force as the employment is casual and/or
sporadic, changing locations, and often providing no separation from living arrangements, Earnings
are not predicable and meagre creating resistance to the taxation required to support change
DGFASLI has attached to its website several reports from the states in India detailing inspection
activity. One state, the National Capital Territory of Delhi, reports that in 2008 there were
approximately 7000 firms within its borders and jurisdiction. These firms employed about
250,000 people. There are almost 17,000,000 residents in this state.
#activity
11-8
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
Health and Safety Law Around the World
The gap
Consider the gap in many countries between written laws and actual OH&S practice. The module
has referred to two factors: the (direct and indirect) limitations on regulatory staff, and the
exclusion of many sectors from the legal jurisdiction of OH&S laws.
What other factors can you think of to explain the gap?
#reveal
Some factors may include:




lack of training of inspectors, who may not recognize or be aware of some workplace
hazards
partisanship on the part of inspectors, who may “ignore” hazards or infractions
inability of courts or government agencies to enforce penalties for infractions that have
been identified during workplace inspections
low educational and literacy levels, and multiple languages and dialects, which make it
difficult to communicate health and safety information to those who will use it.
/reveal
/activity
The Effect of Using External Models
The health and safety laws of some countries were originally created using existing models from
elsewhere. In some cases, early versions of the British Factory Acts were adopted in colonial
territories, such as India. In other countries, modern international codes of practice, conventions,
and standards have been modified slightly and then passed into law.
When legislation is transferred from one country to another, the direction of movement is always
from the more technologically advanced country to the less advanced country. While the legislation
will reflect current knowledge on prevention, it may not address the issue of capability in the
receiving country or recognize society norms. The result can be a lack of enforcement, uneven
compliance, or extensive reliance on information that is not validated with observations in the field.
A Union Carbide pesticide manufacturing plant leaked a mixture of deadly gases on the night of
December 2, 1984, leading to the worst industrial disaster in the history of the industrialized world
and a loss of thousands of lives within hours and an unknown number later.
This YouTube video, made in 2015, provides and overview of the Bhopal Disaster
#image
11-9
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
OCHS 2100
/image
Many of the workers and their families lived within walking distance of the plant. The principal
change to the legislation was a new requirement for employers to do a risk assessment of hazards,
develop a plan to control hazards and emergency situations, advise and train the workers, and to
submit this to the State Inspectorate of Factories.
The problem of workers and the public living so close to the plant continues because of the
availability of shanty housing and lack of public transport. The state, Madhya Pradesh, where Bhopal
is located reports compliance with administration of these amended requirements at 95%, but
provides no assurance or information of the adequacy of the measures taken. Another state has
assessed compliance with administration of these requirements within its borders at 7%. It seems,
at best, an uneasy situation.
Since Bhopal there have been more than 100 releases of hazardous chemicals reported
(Stirling Smith, Occupational Health and Safety in India: An Attempt to Estimate the Real Number of
Work Related Deaths). The death toll from these subsequent releases has been reported at 7000.
Some estimates are higher.
India amended the Factories Act, 1948, 2 years later, in 1987 to deal with chemical processes after
the Bophal Disaster by adding Chapter IVA-Provisions relating to Chemical Processes. The
amendments included provisions for site approval. full disclosure of health hazards, a medical
monitoring program, keeping employee medical records, the power of the Central government to
appoint an Inquiry Committee to investigate hazardous incidents, development of emergency
procedures, appointment of a Safety Committee (The State government can issue an exemption)
and the ability of workers to report imminent hazards. All of these additions could be described as
administrative in nature. There was no wording added on fit testing of respirators or the right to
refuse unsafe work -- nothing that would directly impact the worker at the site.
11-10
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
Health and Safety Law Around the World
OHS Standards
The establishment of threshold limit values or permissible limits of exposure is sometimes
dependent on more than epidemiological data or data relating to available sampling and testing
technology. Occasionally, issues relating to the viability of an industry sector or a process required in
cost effective manufacturing influence decisions on setting a value. All jurisdictions retain the right
to set their own limits or, for that matter, not to set any limit.
The Factories Act, 1948 establishes a threshold limit value that is up to 10 times higher for asbestos
than that recommended by the ACGIH. Schedule 2 in the Act on the DGFASLI website in 2012 shows
the following for asbestos types under the listing for amorphous silicates:
Asbestos.
(a)
Amosite
(b)
Chrystolite
(c)
Crocidolite
* The error in the spelling of Chrysotile is contained in the Factories Act, 1948
0.5 fibres/cc
1.0 fibres/cc*
0.2 fibres/cc
The ACGIH TLV is 0.1 f/cc and does not require identification as to asbestos type.
It is interesting to note that Section 62 in India’s Factory Act prohibits “young persons” (under 18)
from being employed in any work that will expose them to airborne asbestos fibres. This
requirement was likely set to ensure that workers exposed to asbestos have a life expectancy that is
shorter than the latency period for asbestos-related disease.
The manufacture of asbestos-containing products in India is a large industrial sector. A very popular
product is the “poor man’s roof” which is corrugated asbestos-cement panels. Its popularity lies in
its low cost and durability. The industry relies on low cost to maintain its existence making it difficult
to upgrade manufacturing processes; unfortunately, for many buyers or end users, affordability is
the prime consideration in purchase. While India is moving toward a ban it will likely be decades
before the use of asbestos is ended. The repercussions for public health will last even longer.
Adjusting exposure limits to the realities of manufacturing is not always limited to developing
countries. WorkSafeBC did not immediately adopt a change in the ACGIH TLV for styrene monomer
in 2005 at 20 ppm but in response to concerns from the fibreglass products manufacturing sector
initiated a review of health effects and exposure limits and then, in 2009, confirmed the existing
exposure limit of 50 ppm. The review did indicate that the lower limit would not result in an
increase of adverse health problems
The differences between developed countries and developing countries as to what might be
considered as adequate or appropriate isn’t unusual and should not be surprising. In developed
countries, the first standards dealt with working conditions for women and children and later with
guarding of machinery. Requirements to train workers in the hazards of the work came much later.
In most western countries, the right to refuse work was not legislated until the 1970s; WHMIS
legislation was enacted in the late 1980s and it wasn’t until the 1990s that ergonomics and
musculoskeletal injuries were recognized as important issues. In every jurisdiction, OH&S standards
11-11
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
OCHS 2100
were developed to first respond to the immediate sources of injury and disease and only later to the
problems better tackled from a work organization or management of responsibilities perspective.
However, the extent of these differences does indicate that occupational injury and disease will
continue to be a growing problem in developing countries.
Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923
It is the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 that establishes the eligibility, rules, administration,
and benefits for workers’ compensation. The Act is federal and is based on the English model of
liability residing with the “injury” employer. Administration is done at the state level. Eligibility or
application is very restricted being based on the same or similar criteria contained in the Factories
Act, 1948. Consequently, the provisions apply to only about 10% of all workers. The Act is some
40 pages in length; the provisions and their description are not extensive.
Workers are entitled to compensation for injuries and a number of scheduled diseases listed in the
Third Schedule, after three days of disablement. If there is disagreement on entitlement or the
amount of entitlement, the matter is referred to a Commissioner in the state who is authorized
under the Act to arbitrate the amount due the worker. The Commissioner’s decision may be
appealed to the courts. Benefits are derived from a combination of earnings and age, usually
amounting to about 60% of pre-injury earnings. Permanent disability entitlements are calculated
with reference to a chart.
A worker is not entitled to compensation if the worker was under the influence of alcohol or drugs,
did not use personal protective equipment, appliances, or devices where required, or did not follow
instructions designed to protect well-being. Personal liability is an issue as it is Great Britain.
Employees’ State Insurance Plan
In 1952, India introduced a self-financing scheme, the Employees’ State Insurance Act, to provide
health insurance to workers employed in factories with 10 or more workers. It was later extended to
include all organized workers employed at firms with 10 or more workers.
The plan provides medical treatment benefits to employees and their dependants, an
unemployment cash benefit, and maternity benefits. There is a cash benefit for employment related
disablement and a pension benefits in case of death. About 70,000,000 workers are members.
The plan is administered by an agency , the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation, under the
Ministry responsible for Labour. Revenue to support the scheme is raised from contributions by
employers and employees. The plan does exclude eligibility to workers compensation where it
exists.
11-12
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
Health and Safety Law Around the World
The ‘Informal’ Sector
‘Informal’ sector is the term given to a part of the economy that’s small and almost invisible in
affluent countries, but can involve the majority of the work force in less affluent parts of the world.
It is made up of those working outside the official or formal economy where licensing and regulation
and taxation is part of the system. The informal sector includes people selling food, produce, and
consumer goods in open markets and on the street, performing services ranging from gardening to
entertainment, operating rickshaws, and trucks, making crafts and other products, and doing ‘out
work’ for established employers.
In the developing world, workers in this sector earn income but for most the earnings are meagre
and unpredictable. It creates a very temporary respite from the need for food and shelter. For
some, it allows for the provision of leisure but it contains little or no protection from the risks
associated with the employment. or the vagaries of life.
While it is true that many workers in developing countries have no protection under OH&S
requirements or access to compensation entitlements, some workers in developed countries are in
similar situations. The existence of the “informal sector” is not restricted to developing nations.
Individuals working for “under the table money” or “cash only, please” may declare none or only
some of their earnings and consequently are not able to confirm actual earnings for wage loss
compensation benefits. At best, entitlement is reduced; at worst, there is no entitlement.
Similarly, there are usually no enforceable standards to mitigate the risks to health and safety.
Members of the public looking for those services can be similarly put at risk. This isn’t unique to
India or the developing world. The same situation can arise in Canada, ‘unlicensed‘ daycares, beauty
parlours, dental services are examples. In other situations, there is no availability of protection, e.g.
out workers in Ontario.
#reflection
Informal Sectors in Canada
Pick an informal sector occupation that you are familiar with, or that you have observed. It may be
in your own immediate jurisdiction, or in a country you have recently visited. Answer the following
questions:



List as many of the occupational health and safety hazards as you can think of that might be
associated with this occupation.
What health and safety laws apply to this occupation?
Would a worker in this occupation be able to make a claim for workers’ compensation in the
event of a work-related injury or illness? (If so, how are the premiums paid? At what rate
would the worker be compensated?)
/reflection
11-13
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
OCHS 2100
Hazardous Materials and Practices
In 2011, the last Asbestos mine in Quebec closed. The refined Asbestos fibres from the Quebec
mines were exported around the world. In 2016, Canada has yet to ban the import and use of
asbestos although there is a bill before parliament to ban its import and use.
In the developing world, asbestos is still very much in use. Its durability, insulation properties, fire
resistance and low cost make it an ideal material for many applications including its use in building
materials, especially ‘shanty’ housing.
In North America and Europe, its use as a component in products has steadily decreased because of
its proven link to respiratory diseases and its stability in the environment. Its initial low cost has
been countered by stringent OHS and environmental legislation making other materials more cost
effective. Western countries are still dealing with the health repercussions related to the prevalence
of asbestos and the ways in which it is being removed. However, in the developing world, where
OHS standards are not as stringent, it remains a popular material readily available to manufactures
and the public.
In the decades following WWII, the ‘deconstruction’ of ships or ship-breaking became a major
industry in North America and Europe. However, as the risks to health became known and the
measures to control the health and environmental risks more costly, the industry moved to South
Asia, China and Turkey. The unknown presence of and exposure to and disposal of asbestos,
polychlorinated bi-phenols, lead paint, chromium alloys and many other hazardous materials made
ship-breaking increasingly expensive in the western countries. As a result, the industry moved to
countries where workers and, particularly, workers to perform menial labour, were available and
where health, safety and environmental standards were not as developed.
Alang in India is the largest ship-breaking port in the world, up to 200 ships each year are driven at
full speed onto a mud beach at high tide where gangs of workers then begin tearing the ship apart
for scrap steel with hand tools. An estimated 40,000 workers live in the area where toxic substances
are released into the water, into the air and onto the land.
No statistics are kept on workplace injuries and illness but estimates, guesses, put fatalities at about
40 per year. There are no estimates on injuries or illnesses. One report estimates the incidence of
cancer at 2 to 3 times the national average in India.
Two YouTube videos are of interest in exploring these topics:
India's Asbestos Time Bomb
11-14
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
Health and Safety Law Around the World
16:26
Ship Breakers | Bangladesh
15:50
India has a foot in both the developing world and the developed world. While 60% of the population
lives in shanties and works in in the ‘informal’ sector; 40% participate in an industrialized society
that reflects western societies. Progress is being made; in occupational health and safety, much
remains to be done.
The ILO
The International Labour Organization’s OHS Convention
The International Labour Organization (ILO) has been an affiliate of the United Nations (UN) since
1946. It is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland. Its mandate is to develop international labour
11-15
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
OCHS 2100
standards, called Conventions, and review or critique their application. It has no power to impose
sanctions.
It has a tripartite governing structure representing government (2), labour (1), and employers (1).
Employer and worker representatives are usually chosen in agreement with the most “nationally
representative” organization. While worker and employer representatives usually coordinate their
voting, each member has individual voting rights. Human Resources and Skills Development
Canada’s Labour Program represents government.
The Governing Body is composed of the members from 14 countries, including Canada. Their role is
to set the agenda for their three-year term in office. Canada is a member of the governing body.
Specifically, they propose a draft program and budget of the organization for approval by the
members at an annual conference, elect the director-general, request information from member
states concerning labour matters, appoint commissions of inquiry, and supervise the work of ILO
staff.
The draft program will include topics that the ILO feels need to be developed into Conventions, i.e.,
approved proposals. Conventions become international labour standards and when ratified by an
unknown number of countries they become a treaty in international law.
Conventions put forward by the ILO are wide ranging covering topics such as child labour, migrant
labour, holiday pay, minimum pay, rights of workers to organize, maternity benefits, old age
pensions, rights of seafarers, and several Conventions dealing with both occupational health and
safety and workers’ compensation.
In addition to the Conventions, the ILO may issue Recommendations. These usually supplement
Conventions with additional or more detailed provisions but can deal with issues unrelated to the
subject matter contained in a Convention. Recommendations are not considered to be international
standards or treaties.
In 1981, the ILO adopted C155 – Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981, an agreement
on basic OH&S principles. The following is a brief summary of the principles in this Convention:
 Formulate, implement and periodically review a coherent national policy on occupational
safety, occupational health and the work environment. (Article 4)
 Secure the enforcement of laws and regulations concerning occupational safety and health
and the working environment by an adequate and appropriate system of inspection.
(Article 9)
 Provide for adequate penalties for violations of the laws and regulations. (Article 9)
 Take measures to provide guidance to employers and workers to help them to comply with
legal obligations. (Article 10)
 Require that employers, so far as is reasonably practicable, ensure that the workplaces,
machinery, equipment and processes under their control are safe and without risk to health.
(Article 17)
 Require that employers, so far as is reasonably practicable, ensure the chemical, physical
and biological substances and agents under their control are without risk to health when the
appropriate measures of protection are taken. (Article 17)
 Require that employers provide, when necessary, adequate protective clothing and
protective equipment to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, risk of accidents or of
11-16
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
Health and Safety Law Around the World


adverse effects on health. (Article 17)
Require that whenever two or more employers engage in activities simultaneously at one
workplace, they shall collaborate in managing occupational health and safety. (Article 17)
Require employers to provide, where necessary, for measures to deal with emergencies and
accidents, including adequate first-air arrangements. (Article 18)
Notice the similarity in the principles listed above to the legislation reviewed in Modules 3 through
8.
In 2006, the ILO updated the 1981 Convention by expanding on the principles contained in Articles
3, 4, and 5. C187 – Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006
(No. 187) was ratified by Canada on June 11, 2011. This convention adds additional guidance or
direction as follows:





Promote the right of workers to a safe and healthy work environment. (Article 2)
As an essential element of OH&S programs, promote cooperation between management
and workers at the operations or firm level. (Article 4)
Include a mechanism to collect and analyze data on occupational injuries and disease.
(Article 4)
Support the improvement of occupational safety and health conditions in micro, small and
medium size enterprises and the informal sector. (Article 4)
Publicize and endorse the occupational health and safety principles outlined in the ILO
Convention. (Article 5)
The Dean Report and Bill 160 in Module 7, Ontario, makes several recommendations that reflect the
elements in the 1981 and 2006 Conventions. Workers considered to be vulnerable, programs for
small business enterprises, training of workers and high school students, promoting occupational
safety and health, reassessing incentives and penalties, reaffirming enforcement are mentioned.
Several of the modules, particularly Module 3, Federally Regulated Workplaces, emphasize the
Internal Responsibility System.
Summary
In many areas of the world, knowledge of occupational health and safety and the introduction of
technology have led to solutions for many occupational hazards and yet these same issues continue
to challenge the ability of many countries. Differing standards in occupational health and safety, and
differing standards in the use of technology continue to create hardships for workers.
In the developing countries, multinational companies have the resources to implement effective
health and safety programs programs, but these are limited to specific site operations. Domestic
industrial activity has less capital to introduce technology and the smaller profits counter the ability
to introduce programs not directly related to production. Consequently, the working conditions are
usually more hazardous.
The colonial laws that were inherited were too, limited in scope to deal with the modern world.
11-17
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
OCHS 2100
Public health became the larger issue after independence and occupational health and safety only
rose to prominence in the 1980’s. Initial efforts were simply to amend legislations that was decades
old.
Since the 1980’s, there has been a more active process to revise OHS legislation. International
pressure as well as national or internal pressure has created the will to update standards. Lacking
the human resources and the capital to establish more effective enforcement, much of this effort
has been to establish and promote specific technical solutions and fostering a culture that supports
the bipartite relationship inherent in the internal responsibility system of employer and worker.
Efforts have also focused on medical care and surveillance, and promotion. An unfortunate aspect of
external pressure by developed nations has been to encourage the development of standards with
limited or no possibility of application.
Students with an interest in other countries should take the opportunity to explore occupational
health and safety information available online. However, be aware that in some cases, what is
written may be different than what is real.
You have looked at a number of the factors that can affect occupational health and safety in a
country, depending on its economic and political circumstances. These include:

various effects of underdevelopment, including a limited legal system and infrastructure,
the import of unsuited legislation from other countries, public health problems, and
absolute poverty

the import of hazardous materials (asbestos, for example) and work practices (shipbreaking, for example) to countries with less- restrictive laws
You should also now be familiar with the role of ILO in occupational health and safety around the
world.
Bibliography
Index of Fragile States , 2016 Global Fund for Peace. fsi.fundforpeace.org/
Aljazeera; 101 East; India: Toxic Trade. Retrieved February 17, 2017 from
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/101east/2012/01/201211710224787475.html
DGFASLI: Directorate General, Factory Advice Service and Labour Institutes.
dgfasli.nic.in/about1.html
11-18
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17
Health and Safety Law Around the World
Factories Act, 1948. Retrieved February 17, 2017 from http://dgfasli.nic.in/statutes1.htm
International Labour Office Conventions. Retrieved February 17, 2017 from http://en.wikipedia.org/
International Labour Organization. (undated). Mandate. Retrieved February 17, 2017
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/about/mandate.htm
International Labour Organization. (undated). Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981
(No. 155). Retrieved February 17, 2017 from: http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/convde.pl?C15
11-19
WPC #23979.DOC
7/28/17