Posted By Kieran J Duignan Thank you for taking the trouble to direct attention to this document, Philip Browsing through it, I wonder what authority it has in the context of subsidiaries of a multinational company a. where the EU directives influence safety and health regulations, as in the UK b. elsewhere as in the Republic of China Same parent company, differing local contexts. I was exposed to the issue recently when i was doing a video to assess risks of musculoskeletal disorders to operatives in a British subsiiary of a manufactury company. A visiting engineer from a Chinese subsidary enquired what I was doing and then observed, 'O! we don't deal with these risks in China. Only if it is poison!' Apart from passing the enquiry to the IOSH librarian, how can I find out whether the Republic of China has ratified the Convention asscoiated with the ILO proclamation?

Posted By Jay Joshi In a era of globalisation, it is imperative that developing countries, especially emerging economies e.g. China & India, to name a couple are encoraged to ratify and then actually implement the conventions. I could access the details of the 32nd session of the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India's Tripartite Committee on ILO conventions dated 25th February 2009. It is obvious India has a huge mountain to climb when you compare the overall state of the Indian "Occupational Health and Safety System" with most of the mature ones in developed countries. http://labour.nic.in/ilas/32coc/Attachment.pdf

Posted By Philip McAleenan Hi Kieran, Conventions such as these have no binding power on member countries and are usually constructed in such a manner that when a country does ratify it, it still doesn’t make law. It does however provide citizens and interest groups with support to push their government, (whether they have ratified or not) to move towards implementing the principles contained within the conventions. The list of ratifications of this convention to date are:- Cuba, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Japan, Rep. Of Korea, Niger, Spain, Sweden, and the UK. And though China has not ratified this convention, their constitution (Art 42, Right and Duty to Work) states: “Through various channels, the state creates conditions for employment, enhances occupational safety and health, improves working conditions and, on the basis of expanded production, increases remuneration for work and welfare benefits”. Large multinationals have power to influence the safety and health practices, if not in the host country, at least in respect of how they operate their business in that country. Thus if they decide to assess and control hazards in a manner that is above and beyond the local legal requirements, they can do so. In fact if you have a look at the OECD principles of corporate governance, you will see that the rights of stakeholders (and that includes workers) have to recognised and respected. Again, though China is not yet a member of the OECD there is a process of enhanced engagement between OECD and China in order to strengthen co-operation. So like many other situations, it is not simply a matter of having a specific law to decide whether something ought to be done or not, but rather it is a combination of a range of factors that are all driving towards improved conditions, and those in a position to do so should take the initiative and lead the way, whether obliged by law or not. And of course diplomacy rather than legal coercion will win people over. Hopefully this helps, Philip

Posted By Kieran J Duignan Thanks for this discussion. To me, as a safety ergonomist, the constrasts in beliefs about the rights of individual employees sometimes has direct implications how comparisons to draw to the atteniton of managment. For they do travel regularly in Asia and Africa where they are expected to make smart sense of contrasting cultures. Allowing for modest differences over long timeperiods, physical differences relevant ot safety are mainly between sexes and between able-bodied and people with disabilities. So, standardisation through international standards is worth pursuing on these grounds while ILO conventions and publications can stimulate awareness of relevant sex and 'disability' differences.