Discussions between government and social partners on the management of the heat emergency in workplaces restarted
Employers' associations and trade unions convened on 20 June at the Ministry of Labour after last July's protocol remained a dead letter, following complaints from companies
4' min read
Key points
4' min read
Employers' associations and trade union representatives are summoned to the Ministry of Labour tomorrow morning (20 June) to resume talks on initiatives and measures to be taken to deal with climatic emergencies in the workplace, in particular heat waves that can put workers' health at risk, especially in sectors where they are exposed to the sun (construction, agriculture).
The protocol for the adoption of measures to contain occupational risks from exposure to high temperatures in the workplace presented in July 2023 by the Ministry of Labour and Health to the social partners remained a dead letter. It contains operational guidelines with an explicit reference to the possibility of 'eliminating or, when not possible, reducing the direct exposure of workers to high temperatures or perceived high temperatures by scheduling breaks or activities on cooler days or times'.
The objections of companies
.The employers' associations contested the approach of that protocol, claiming that new rules would be added to the operational indications of Inail, Inps, Inl, Asl, decrees of the Ministries of Labour and Health, and regional ordinances, with the risk of new burdens for companies, while they would have preferred to have a decalogue with some clearly indicated priorities in order to be in compliance, on the model of what was done with the protocol signed during Covid, in line with what is provided for by Legislative Decree 81 of 2008 on health and safety in the workplace.
The trade unions' demands
.The trade unions, on the other hand, had presented last July some corrective proposals that they are ready to re-submit to the government, as Ivana Veronese, confederal secretary of Uil, summarises: 'We continue to ask for a protocol that provides for automatisms, such as recourse to the redundancy fund if the perceived heat exceeds certain degrees, in the absence of changes in the organisation of work that shift working hours to the less hot hours, with the provision of individual protection devices, such as sunscreen, and the supply of water when working outdoors. We call for heat-related deaths to be recorded and not generically framed as illnesses, and for fragile workers to be identified for protection in certain weather conditions, as was done during Covid with smart working'.
The Fillea-Cgil construction workers have launched an appeal for an 'adequate regulatory intervention with measures to protect workers', in the voice of secretary Giulia Bartoli (Fillea), who considers the first ordinances of the administrations prohibiting work above 35 degrees to be insufficient: 'What is needed is a serious and structural regulatory intervention that definitively recognises for construction and stone workers access to the redundancy fund for climatic events,' she argues.
