Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Psychosocial workplace risk assessment Participatory experience in a Chilean copper mine
José Ignacio Méndez, MD, MPH, MSc
Santiago de Chile, November 8th 2017
The mining industry in Chile
Aug. 5th 2010: Copiapó Mine Accident:
33 miners trapped during 69 days
The mining industry in Chile at a glance
• Chile: a world leader in metal production (2017)(1): – N°1 Copper (28% production; 29% reserves) – N°2 Molybdenum (23% production, 11% reserves) – N°4 Silver (6% production, 14% reserves) – N°14 Gold (1% production, 7% reserves)
• Mining accounts for 10% of Chilean gross national product(2).
• Near 9% of jobs (3% direct + 6% indirect)(3). • One of the most hazardous occupations
high concern in order to improve working conditions.
Sources: 1. Consejo Minero de Chile (www.consejominero.cl) 2. Ministerio de Economía (www.economia.gob.cl) 3. Ministerio del Trabajo y Previsión Social (www.mintrab.gob.cl)
Copyrights © 2016 Codelco Chile. Todos los Derechos Reservados. | Copyrights © 2016 by Codelco Chile All Rights Reserved.
Gabriela Mistral 2.960 msnm
Radomiro Tomic 2.960 msnm
Salvador 2.600 msnm
Ventanas A nivel del mar
Casa Matriz 543 msnm
VP Variable
Chuquicamata 2.870 msnm
Ministro Hales 2.740 msnm
Andina 3.700 – 4.200msnm
El Teniente 2.500 msnm
CODELCO - Corporación del Cobre
• World´s largest copper mining Company
• Chilean state owned • Near 18.500 employees
División Andina – Corporación del Cobre (CODELCO)
División Andina – Corporación del Cobre (CODELCO)
• N° workers: 1705 (5.4% women)
• Shift system: SPECIAL (4 days work x 4 days off) 2 day-shifts (08:00-20:00) 2 night-shifts (20:00-08:00) 4 days off
• Self-administration of Social Insurance for Work-related
Accidents and Occupational Diseases (Law N° 16.744)
• 3 labor Unions
• N° sub-contractors: 4000-7000 (>100 companies)
Occupational hazards assessment in Chilean mining
Type of hazard Assessment Protocols
Chemical Dust (silica), asbestos, gases
Physical Noise, vibrations, electrical
Biological HIV, hepatitis A-B (healthcare)
Ergonomic Manual handling, upper limb
Psychosocial No regulation until 2013
By year 2013, many occupational hazards already had surveillance regulations by Health Ministry
What are psychosocial risks and how are they assessed?
2013: Psychosocial workplace risk assessment, a new challenge for Chilean companies
• Ministry of Health Psychosocial Workplace Risk Assessment Protocol
• Main features: Obligation for every company to assess
psychosocial risk at workplace SUSESO-ISTAS 21 (COPSOQ Chilean
version) is the only valid surveillance questionnaire
5 dimensions (3 levels of risk for each)
5 global risk levels Every level or risk determines a specific
term (3-6-12 months) to implement interventions and re-assesss
Only high risk levels had to be communicated to OSH companies and health authorities
2013: Psychosocial workplace risk assessment, a new challenge for Chilean companies
• Main weaknesses:
– Ineffective communication strategy
– Lack of trained professionals in Chile
– No prior experience or training required to assess psychosocial risks done by risk prevention professionals
– Almost no responsabilities for OSH companies
– Erratic and confusing audits and inspections from health authorities
Our experience from 2013 to 2015
• First challenge was to achieve a continuous commitment from: Managers
Unions
Workers
• A Psychosocial Risk Committee was created, with the participation of: OSH and Humans Resources managers
Delegates from Unions (3)
Occupational Health professionals:
o Occupational Physician
o Occupational Psychologist
o Social Worker
Education Awareness TRUST
First application process (CODELCO workers)
• Set a Psychosocial roadmap with priority Units (operative and shift workers first)
• Define Analysis Units (even though it was not required at first), which were set as follows:
DEPARTMENT Intendency or
Direction Shift Group
A.U.2
A.U.1
A.U.3
A.U.4
A.U.5
First application process (2014-2015)
1. Application was on working site
2. Awareness 5-minute intervention (“not just another survey”)
3. Brief version of questionnaire (20 items) was answered (100% response rate)
4. Commitment to give feedback in “focus groups” within 1-2 months
Copyrights © 2016 Codelco Chile. Todos los Derechos Reservados. | Copyrights © 2016 by Codelco Chile All Rights Reserved.
First application process (2014-2015)
193 quest.
26 quest.
36 quest.
105 quest.
Year 2014
Year 2015
72 quest.
367 quest.
42 quest.
Staff areas
Total
726
ISTAS-21 questionnaire (short version – 20q)
Example Risk level in each Dimension + Global Psychosocial Risk
>50% workers
HIGH RISK LEVEL 2
Psychosocial Risk management according to Risk Level
Results from the 1st application process
Example: Open Pit Mine (great variability among Analyses Units)
Group 1 54 47 87% jul-14 X 12 months Brief Intervention
Group 2 55 42 76% jul-14 X 6 months CompleteIntervention &
Authorities
Group 3 56 45 80% jul-14 X 12 months Brief Intervention
Group 4 53 42 79% jul-14 X 2 years Brief Promotion
Group 5x2 25 17 68% jul-14 X 12 months Brief Intervention
TOTAL 243 193 79%
High risk
1st
application
(month-
year)
Other
actions
Next
evaluation
Questionn.
version for
next
evaluationNo riskMedium
risk Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Management
section
Analyses
Units
Open Pit Mine
N°
workers
N°
quest.
% workers
that were
surveyed
Workplace psychosocial risk level
Psychosocial Risk “Traffic Lights” Open Pit Mine
5% 21%
7% 2%
36% 26%
29% 40%
43%
40%
69%
50% 52% 55%
24%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Group 2: HIGH RISK LEVEL 3
24% 40%
33% 17%
43%
43%
40% 38%
43%
33%
33% 19%
29% 40%
24%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Group 4: NO RISK
Same size, same working conditions, same tasks, same salary….
Different ways of leadership, communicating and facing conflicts
75% of workers had NO absenteeism 45% of workers had NO absenteeism
How to explain these results? What specific interventions were needed?
1. Analyzing dimensions and sub-dimensions of questionnaires
2. Qualitative assessment (“psychosocial conversation groups”):
– Give feedback of surveillance process
– Participative discussion of results
– Proposing interventions
– Adquisition of individual commitment and engagement
(2014-2017) 43 groups
462 participants
Psychosocial Conversation Groups (Focus Groups)
• In our setting, higher risks are usually related to low social support (from supervisors) and low quality of leadership.
• Some other recurrent situations* were claimed:
– Violence at work
– Harrassment at work
– Gender-related psychosocial risk conditions (women working in mining)
– Mining culture related situations: hierarchies, relation with subcontractors, superstitions and many others
* These situations would probably not have been detected if only questionnaire was applied qualitative assessment is extremely valuable and helpful to design interventions
Psychosocial Interventions
• Psychosocial intervention plan for each Department/Analysis Unit: – Written report to managers + work meeting
– Unions support and advice
– Psychosocial plan champions, actions and deadlines Re-assessment
– Communication strategy
– Continuous support from Occupational Health Dpt. professionals
– Correlation of results with other data (work-related accidents, absenteeism)
Group 1 54 47 87% jul-14 X 12 months Brief Intervention
Group 2 55 42 76% oct-16 X 12 months Brief Intervention
Group 3 56 45 80% jun-17 X 12 months Brief Intervention
Group 4 53 42 79% jul-14 X 2 years Brief Promotion
Group 5x2 25 17 68% jul-14 X 12 months Brief Intervention
TOTAL 243 193 79%
High risk
1st
application
(month-
year)
Other
actions
Next
evaluation
Questionn.
version for
next
evaluationNo riskMedium
risk Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Management
section
Analyses
Units
Open Pit Mine
N°
workers
N°
quest.
% workers
that were
surveyed
Workplace psychosocial risk level
Re-assessment process after interventions (complete version of ISTAS-21 questionnaire if high risk was detected)
Example: Open Pit Mine (Lower risk level
Copyrights © 2016 Codelco Chile. Todos los Derechos Reservados. | Copyrights © 2016 by Codelco Chile All Rights Reserved.
Our experience from 2016 until today
Manual del Método del Cuestionario SUSESO/ISTAS 21 • Regulation of methodological
aspects of Psychosocial Workplace Risk assessment
• Participatory Application Committees in every working place
• Technical requirements for Psychosocial professionals
• Education and training in Psychosocial risks is mandatory
• Continuous support from OSH specialists to their companies
SUSESO-ISTAS 21 Participative Method (7 steps)
Conclusions
• Psychosocial risk assessment requires commitment of managers, workers and their leaders based on trust
• Continuous education and training is needed: OSH and Human Resources professionals, managers, unions & workers
• Strenghten workers participation unions & OSH committees
• Move along from “participatory assessment” to “participatory intervention”
• Scientific research evidence-based local psychosocial interventions for specific settings
