Partie d'ouvrage collectif
Résumé : European Union legislative action in the field of workers’ health and safety has been put on the back burner since the beginning of the 21st century. The main reason for this is not specific to occupational health but reflects the general weakening of social policies in the EU, a trend which became clearly noticeable when the focus of the Lisbon Strategy was adjusted in 2004-2005. It is also linked to the gradual implementation of the ‘Better Regulation’ agenda, under which legislative initiatives have been made dependent on their supposed economic impact. This weakening of Community occupational health policy can be traced by examining the various strategies established for 2002-2006, 2007-2012, and finally 2014-2020. In terms of occupational health legislation, there is a striking contrast between the large amount of legislation produced in the wake of the Single European Act (1986), and the far smaller number of texts produced as of 2002. The table annexed to this chapter gives an overview of the legislation adopted. This quantitative reduction, however, is only one aspect of the change. In terms of quality, the few directives worked on since 2002 have been the subject of tough negotiations, providing only a partial, and often insufficient, response to the needs they were supposed to meet. In May 2016, a glimmer of hope arose with the launch of the revision of the directive on carcinogens and mutagens at work. Will this change of direction lead to a revitalisation of Community policy, or will it remain a one-off? This chapter examines the development of European regulation in this area over the last twenty years. After considering the needs to which it is responding, and dwelling on the fact that Community legislation is a vital tool in this area if we are to see harmonised progress on living and working conditions in Europe (Section 1), we examine the impact of ‘Better Regulation’ (Section 2). The revision of the carcinogens and mutagens directive (Section 3) raises some particularly interesting questions. It seems to go against a general trend unfavourable to rules protecting workers’ lives and health. We shall attempt, therefore, to understand how, at a particular point in time, multiple complex factors have created an unexpected window of opportunity. Section 4 shows that the renewed activity in relation to cancer has not yet been able to revive Community policies on other priority occupational health issues. Major challenges remain: the still worrying level of musculoskeletal disorders and the strong emergence of psychosocial risks require an approach to occupational health going beyond material risks. These reflect aspects of work organisation needing to be regulated with a view to counteracting the power of employers. We conclude on the need to consider health and safety issues as part of a broader approach linking societal issues to workplace democracy. In our view, a purely technical approach to occupational health rules is bound to be inefficient and basically legitimises the double standards under which the health of people at work is far less well protected than their health in other contexts (regulations on the marketing of foodstuffs, medicines, cosmetics, rules on transport safety, air and water quality etc.).