Psychosocial Risk Management: Policy Context and Social Dialogue

1. Psychosocial Risk Management: Policy Context and Social Dialogue M. Ertel, U. StilijanowFederal Institute for Occupational Health and Safety, Berlin Unit “Mental Workload, Stress and Work Design”

2. Presentation outline • Research field • Methods • Analytical results: • EU-Legislation on OSH • European Social Dialogue • Challenges to PRIMA • Recommendations • Policy level • Branch/ workplace level • The pyramid model of multi-level approaches

3. Research field: The macro context of Psychosocial Risk MAnagement (PRIMA) OSH Legislation Industrial Relations/Social Dialogue Globalisation PRIMA Political Priorities EU-Enlargement Economic Performance Stakeholder Interests EU-Strategies & Initiatives

4. Methods • Literature review • Expert Interviews • PRIMA-EF stakeholder workshop (Jan. 2008) with expert focus groups on Social Dialogue and regulations/initiatives (see www.prima-ef.org) • Results of the PRIMA-EF stakeholder survey from ISPESL

5. Results: EU-Legislation on OSH Starting from Framework directive 89/391/EEC • General obligation of employers to ensure workers health and safety in every aspect related to work • Implicitly includes psychosocial aspects Impact assessment by OSH Stakeholders: 34% of stakeholders in the EU27 consider the directive to be effective for Psychosocial Risk Management (EU 15: 51%; new EU states: 10%) source: PRIMA-EF stakeholder survey

6. Results: European Social Dialogue(www.ec.europa.eu/socialdialogue) Framework Agreements: on work-related stress (2004) & on harassment and violence at work (2007) Agreement on WRS: Implementation heterogenous and mostly “soft”, e.g. guidelines, recommendations or collective agreements (see: http://www.etuc.org/a/2377) Impact assessment by OSH Stakeholders: 29% of stakeholders consider the agreement on WRS to have an impact on stress management in their country (employers‘ associations: 50%, trade unions: 18%) source: PRIMA-EF stakeholder survey

7. Results: Challenges to PRIMA EU Enlargement: • Lack of tradition and weak structures of social dialogue in CEE countries • Preoccupation with issues of economic growth and productivity Divergent Stakeholder perspectives: • Trade unions favour binding regulations • Employers call for voluntary approaches Lack of capacities and awareness

8. Recommendations: policy level • To improve the impact of OSH-legislation and Social Dialogue, capacities and expertise need to be strengthened (e.g. enforcement capabilities, SD structures, general problem awareness) • Different approaches, e.g. Social Dialogue and Legislation, may act in a complementary way • Existing national Strategies can serve as examples of good practice, e.g. • Netherlands: Covenants • UK: Management Standards • Denmark: Training and tools for labour inspectors

9. Recommendations: branch/ workplace level • Social partners should • engage in building mutual trust and a culture of cooperation • create win-win situations (e.g. healthy workforce – higher productivity) • Seemingly paradoxical effects of actions should be considered, (e.g. awareness raising on violence and bullying may result in a higher level of complaints) • Gender issues should be considered, in particular with regard to violence and harassment at the workplace

10. The pyramid model of multi-level approachesfor psychosocial risk management PRIMA Awareness Raising Education/ Dissemination Action Research Voluntary Engagement CSR/ best practice National Initiatives Funding/ Programmes Social Dialogue Consensus building/ Employee Participation OSH-Legislation Enforcement/ Guidance

11. Thank you! Michael Ertel Ertel.Michael@baua.bund.de Ulrike Stilijanow Stilijanow.Ulrike@baua.bund.de www.prima-ef.org