Occupational risk* is the likelihood of harm to health as a result of exposure to harmful and (or) hazardous production factors when an employee performs duties under an employment contract or in other cases.

Occupational risk class** – the level of industrial injuries, occupational diseases and costs of insurance coverage, prevailing by type of economic activity of the insured.

06/24/2003 The Chief State Sanitary Doctor of the Russian Federation approved the assessment methodology professional risks R 2.2.1766-03. 2.2 “Occupational hygiene. Guidelines for assessing occupational health risks for workers. Organizational methodological foundations, principles and evaluation criteria. Management". This document is advisory in nature. As of today, there are no other methods for calculating professional risks approved at the state level.

Let's analyze the above mentioned technique. Table 1 shows how, based on the R 2.2.1766-03 methodology, occupational risk is assessed depending on the class of working conditions (based on the results of a special assessment of working conditions) and the index of occupational diseases.

Table 1

Classes of working conditions, categories of occupational risk and urgency of preventive measures

The practice of applying the R 2.2.1766-03 methodology shows that there are certain omissions in it, which undoubtedly affects the adequate assessment of occupational risk. As can be seen from the table above, the method R 2.2.1766-03 takes into account only the risk of occupational diseases, and the probability of injury is not considered. Therefore, according to the methodology, we can conclude that in workplaces with working conditions class 1 (optimal), there is no occupational risk at all (equal to zero). Meanwhile, occupational risk exists in any activity, which is confirmed, in particular, by the recording of accidents and injuries in offices with working conditions class 1.

To do this, you need to combine the following data:

1. integral assessment of working conditions based on the results of a special assessment of working conditions (SOUT);
2. employee health indicators based on the results of periodic medical examinations;
3. individual characteristics of the employee, which will make it possible to introduce appropriate correction factors into the amount of the individual profit margin depending on the length of service and age of the employee

Let's take a closer look.

1. Integral assessment of working conditions in the workplace― is based on a quantitative assessment of 14 main indicators of harmful factors.

2. Employee health indicator― this is an indicator that an employee belongs to a certain group of clinical observation, which almost completely coincides with the interpretation of the results of medical examination of the adult working population, adopted by the Ministry of Health of the country. The difference is that an employee who has identified signs of exposure to factors on the body is assigned a health indicator value of “4,” and an employee who is suspected of having an occupational disease is assigned a value of “5” (Table 2).

Table 2

Employee health indicator

3. Individual characteristics of the employee- this is age and experience in the profession. (Table 3)

* Article 209 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation

** art. 3 of Federal Law No. 125-FZ of July 24, 1998 “On compulsory social insurance against industrial accidents and occupational diseases”

Until 2014, the degree of occupational risk in Russia was assessed by the workplace certification procedure (AWC). Since 2014, it has been replaced by a special assessment of working conditions. However, many employers continue to confuse the OHS procedure with occupational risk assessment. What is the difference between two similar occupational safety measures?

Occupational risk assessment is a system of measures that provide for both SOUT, and assessment of injury risks, and assessment of the protection of workers with personal protective equipment, and assessment of individual occupational risks of workers. Thus, the fundamental difference between a special assessment and an assessment of professional risks is in the scale:

• SOUT is aimed at checking a specific workplace, assessment of professional risks - at all the activities of the employee from the point of view of the danger to which he exposes himself.
• SOUT evaluates the place, assesses professional risks - the employee.
• SOUT involves instrumental measurements of specific harmful and dangerous factors and drawing up a conclusion based on these indicators. When assessing occupational risks, no measurements are taken.

Occupational risk assessment is at the intersection of occupational safety and health (medicine). Its main goals:

• Determining the potential threat present in the work process itself;
• Updating the list of measures necessary to ensure the safety and health of workers;
• Selecting the right equipment and materials for the job;
• Checking the effectiveness of ongoing labor protection measures;
• Ensuring preventive measures to protect the health and safety of workers.

Why do we need a professional risk assessment?

A check of the level of risk in relation to workers must be carried out every time any changes are made in the work process: new equipment is put into operation, workplaces are moved to other premises, the organization of work is changed, new equipment and materials are used.

The advantages of assessing occupational risks include:

1. Preparing the organization for certification according to the international OHSAS professional safety management system;
2. Organization of control of hazardous factors in the working environment;
3. Providing the employee with objective information about the risks to which he exposes himself.

Methodology and indicators for assessing professional risks

There is no specific official methodology and regulations that allow identifying occupational risks in Russia. The basis for the assessment is:

• OHSAS 18001:2007 Occupational Health and Safety Assessment Series;
• Manual on occupational safety and health management systems ILO-OSH 2001 / ILO-OSH 2001;
• R 2.2.1766-03 Guidelines for assessing occupational health risks for workers. Organizational and methodological foundations, principles and evaluation criteria.

When assessing professional risks, it is important for an employer to be based on two main principles:

1. Assess all possible risks when organizing an employee’s activities;
2. Find out whether it is possible to eliminate the risk completely, or calculate its likely consequences.

Simple example: When installing soundproofing films on glass in an office or workshop, you should evaluate in advance whether they will provide adequate air ventilation. If the noise level is reduced, but the quality of room ventilation is reduced, the employer will get rid of one risk, but will acquire another, no less dangerous.

Procedure for assessing professional risks:

1. Determining the list of professions and jobs that need to be assessed;
2. Determining the number of employees employed in a particular position at a specific workplace;
3. Determining the operations regularly performed by the employee and their frequency;
4. Identification of hazards (risks) for each such operation;
5. Determination of the number of dangerous operations;
6. Determining the possibility of eliminating risks or the severity of their consequences;
7. Risk calculation and analysis.

So, to reduce risks for a specific employee, you can:

• Automate the process;
• Distribute the workload evenly among several employees;
• Introduce new technologies, raw materials or materials that reduce the degree of danger;
• Use more effective means personal protection.

Solutions to a specific problem will depend on its essence, and for each problem there may be several of them. The employer needs to choose the most effective ones.

It is very difficult and almost impossible to determine occupational risks by eye and conduct a special assessment. Consider the fact that it is necessary to involve occupational safety engineers; measuring instruments. Above, you have already become familiar with some of the difficulties in improving workplaces for employees, which makes you think about help from organizations.

For a competent and competent risk assessment, it is recommended to involve experienced labor protection engineers, including those from independent accredited organizations. Attek specialists and experts will be happy to provide you with qualified assistance in assessing professional risks and provide the necessary consultations.

Greetings, dear friends! For everyone who wants to become familiar with risk assessment and management of their levels, and for those who are already in the subject, I suggest that you familiarize yourself with the working material shared by our colleague and subscriber Ekaterina Zvyagina. So don’t forget to put a star rating at the end of this note and say merci in the comments or constructively indicate comments and suggestions.

We identify hazards and manage the level of risk in the organization

Katya not only provided an example of identifying hazards and managing the level of risk, but also provided the documents with an explanatory message. I quote:

Hello, colleagues!

I would like to note right away that this standard is an internal local document of our organization, but on its basis, you will be able to develop something of your own, simplify it somewhere (there is nowhere to complicate it)), and put this procedure into effect at your enterprise )). Since there are a lot of you, I am sending you the developed assessment card for a sample.

So, there are two ways to carry out this procedure - simple and more accurate and correct:

Simple - we determine the production processes that your employee must perform during working hours (from the instructions), take instructions on the types of work and profession (which are included in the initial training program at the workplace) and write down from there the dangerous and harmful factors that await the employee at his workplace (except for the factors already indicated in the SOUT) - this is “Danger” for us, we divide each factor into possible consequences in the event of a “Danger”, this is a “Dangerous Event” for us, and then we describe the consequences.

Based on the data from the identification cards, an action plan is subsequently developed to eliminate high risks and reduce the level of medium and low risks.

The second way is to decide on production processes, i.e. starting from the moment when the employee’s foot crossed the threshold of your enterprise (or the transport on which you deliver this employee to the place of work) and ending with the same only in the opposite direction)) and analyze step by step where he walks and what he does (movement on slippery surfaces, being near rotating and moving mechanisms) in general, everything that can lie in wait for him, no matter where he is and no matter what he does during working hours. And then everything is as described in the first version.

We introduce the workers under signature and live in peace, since we informed them about all the dangers and risks and measures to reduce them.))

I hope this information useful for you.

Please write to me in the comments about your impressions and thoughts on this matter, if you don’t mind)

DOWNLOAD DOCUMENTS

Set of working documents on hazard identification and risk management

That's all. I was talking about stars 😉

To be continued...

Three approaches to assessing occupational risk

Nadezhda SIMONOVA,
Doctor of Medicine, Professor, Director of the Department of scientific work
Klin Institute of Safety and Working Conditions

Despite the fact that the term “occupational risk” entered the field of occupational medicine in the early 70s. XX century, in the theory of domestic occupational medicine it began to be used only in the XXI century. In 2001, the reference book “Occupational Risk” was published (edited by N.F. Izmeren, E.I. Denisov), and in 2003 - the Guide “Occupational Risk for the Health of Workers” (edited by N.F. . Izmerova, E.I. Denisova) and the approved document R 2.2.1766-03 “Guide to assessing occupational health risks for workers. Organizational and methodological foundations, principles and evaluation criteria.”

However, in the practice of labor protection and social insurance Professional risk received legal status even a little earlier - with the adoption of Federal Law No. 125-FZ of July 24, 1998 “On compulsory social insurance against industrial accidents and occupational diseases.” This law defines occupational risk as the probability of damage (loss) to the health or death of the insured associated with the performance of his duties under an employment contract.

Three years later, the concept of occupational risk was introduced into Labor Code RF (Federal Law of December 30, 2001 No. 197-FZ, hereinafter referred to as the Labor Code of the Russian Federation), which talks about the employer’s obligation to ensure that employees are informed about labor conditions and safety, the risk of damage to health and the compensation and personal protective equipment they are entitled to, as well as the employee’s right to this information. Since that time, we can consider that occupational risk is “moving across the country”, as a result of which a large number of works appear on its assessment using a variety of methodological approaches.

The phenomenon of professional risk in the Labor Code of the Russian Federation received further development with the introduction of amendments by Federal Law dated July 18, 2011 No. 238-FZ. Currently Art. 209 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation contains a definition of occupational risk, which is directly linked to the procedure for its assessment: “Occupational risk is the likelihood of causing harm to health as a result of exposure to harmful and (or) hazardous production factors when an employee performs duties under an employment contract or in other cases established this Code, other federal laws. The procedure for assessing the level of occupational risk is established by the federal executive body exercising the functions of developing state policy and legal regulation in the field of labor, taking into account the opinion of the Russian Tripartite Commission for the Regulation of Social and Labor Relations.”

For the first time, the Labor Code of the Russian Federation introduces the concept of professional risk management, which is understood as “a set of interrelated measures, including measures to identify, assess and reduce levels of professional risks.” The regulations on the occupational risk management system are approved by the federal executive body, which carries out the functions of developing state policy and legal regulation in the field of labor, taking into account the opinion of the Russian tripartite commission of social and labor relations (RTK).

Currently, the order of the Ministry of Health and Social Development of Russia dated February 14, 2012 No. 125 “On approval of the Set of measures aimed at preserving the health of workers at work for 2012 - 2015” has come into force, according to which an assessment procedure should have been developed in 2012 professional risk, Regulations on the professional risk management system, by 2013 - a methodology for a comprehensive assessment of professional risks in the workplace for carrying out the procedure mandatory assessment professional risks, as well as a number of activities to implement in 2012 - 2013. pilot projects on assessment and management of professional risks in various types economic activity.

The variety of problems solved in risk assessment requires the development and use of several methods, since it is difficult to imagine one universal method that would allow solving all problems.

Tasks that can be solved in the process of assessing professional risk:

• obtaining reasonable qualitative and/or quantitative data on the actual level of risk to the health of the employee(s) depending on actual working conditions;
• informing the employee about the actual occupational risk in his workplace and measures taken by the employer to reduce it;
• making economically and socially sound decisions to reduce risk (protecting employee health);
• assessing the effectiveness of management actions to reduce risk;
• obtaining group (industry) indicators of professional risk and ranking activities by risk level;
• justification and calculation of insurance payments, allowances and discounts in the compulsory social insurance system;
• justification of benefits and compensation for harmful and dangerous working conditions;
• development of systems and means of collective and individual protection and assessment of their effectiveness;
• obtaining representative data on the effect of working conditions on the health of workers (evidence-based medicine);
• testing and correction of hygienic standards, etc.

All currently used models for assessing professional risk can be divided into three groups: managerial, theoretical (mathematical) and economic.

A typical example of a management risk assessment model is the model developed in Finland and recommended for use as a practical guide by the International Labor Organization (ILO).

When using this type of risk assessment model, special working groups are created in the organization, including managers at various levels and workers, that is, the organization’s personnel, who then, using special questionnaires, assess the presence or absence of risk in the workplace by simply choosing from ready-made options or expertly. If there are any special risks, based on the initial information, the need for a more detailed analysis and the assistance of third-party specialists is decided.

Among the physical, chemical and biological factors, constant noise, impulse noise, air temperature, local vibration, draft, radiation, harmful substances, etc. are assessed.

Attention is drawn to the following risk factors for accidents: the possibility of slipping, the possibility of tripping, rising or falling from a height, the danger of staying indoors, getting stuck in a moving object, lack of safety equipment.

Among the ergonomic factors, the most important are cleanliness and order in the workplace, passages, exits and escape routes, the height of the working surface, the position of the arms and shoulders, lifting weights, and the ability to change the working position.

Attention is also paid to psychological overload. This is the largest group. It includes factors such as monotonous work, working alone and at night, long periods of concentrated observation, haste, too high demands and goals, lack of career opportunities, work instructions, distribution of work, working hours, overtime, uncertainty in labor relations, poor work environment, conflict, abusive relationships, threat of violence, lack of social support.

The management model of risk assessment can be roughly compared with a pre-flight mandatory check by the crew of the aircraft’s readiness for takeoff, when the ship’s commander, strictly in accordance with the instructions, names the aircraft’s systems sequentially, and the crew members confirm their serviceability and readiness. The conclusion about the presence of risk and the necessary measures to minimize it is made directly during its assessment and immediately after the end of the procedure.

The management risk assessment model does not pose or solve the problem of a single-number quantitative risk assessment; its results are not used directly in the social insurance system against accidents and occupational diseases (other models are being developed and applied for this purpose). However, it allows us to satisfactorily assess the significance of various occupational risk factors in the workplace and justify priority measures aimed at reducing risk.

A typical example of a theoretical model for assessing occupational risk is the model developed by domestic researchers, the methodological foundations of which are set out in the Guide “Occupational Risk to the Health of Workers” and the guidance document approved in the system of state sanitary and epidemiological regulation (Guide to the assessment of occupational risk to the health of workers, methodological fundamentals, principles and evaluation criteria. Guide R 2.2.1766-03. Ed. N.F.

The magnitude of occupational risk (RR) using this method is assessed as the ratio of the corresponding health indicators of workers in the studied occupational group (RRi) to similar indicators in the comparison group or control group (RRk):
RR = RRi / RRk.
An assessment of the degree of cause-and-effect relationship between health problems and work using this method is presented in Table. 1, where the etiological share is understood as the proportion of harmful working conditions in the general complex of factors that can influence the development of a particular disease.

Table 1. Assessment of the cause-and-effect relationship between health problems and work

The technique requires simultaneous research in the study and control groups and does not allow comparing the results obtained by different authors using different control groups.

Particular attention should be paid to works in which the authors try to use this technique to assess the degree of work-related diseases identified in industrial workers. At the same time, unfortunately, the prevalence in workers of those diseases that are included in the National List of Occupational Diseases, identified during periodic medical examinations, but for various reasons do not go through the procedure of examining the connection of the disease with the profession, is often assessed on the basis of risk theory.

For example, we can talk about sensorineural hearing loss in workers in “noise professions”, radiculopathies, lumbodynia and other lesions of the musculoskeletal system in workers engaged in heavy physical labor, etc. Moreover, in many cases, the quantitative assessment obtained by the authors of the degree of conditionality of the disease by actual working conditions “does not reach” “almost complete”, that is, the one when the disease can supposedly be considered occupational. The authors rightly raise the question: is it necessary (or is it possible) to associate a disease with an occupation if, based on the risk assessment performed by the authors, there is no evidence that this disease is “almost completely” caused by work in the analyzed occupational group?

Despite the fact that the authors of this method are based on the principles of so-called evidence-based medicine, this approach to the problem of identifying and diagnosing occupational diseases in modern Russia, in our opinion, is deeply erroneous and is due to a misunderstanding of the specifics of the list version of the diagnosis of occupational diseases adopted in the country, as well as the essence of the procedure professional risk assessment, its goals and objectives.

Since the country has adopted a list principle for diagnosing occupational diseases, all diseases included in the List, if there are necessary and sufficient hygienic grounds, should be recognized as occupational. So, for example, if an employee has clinical signs of vibration disease, and it is known that he works in conditions of constant exposure to local vibration, the levels of which exceed the maximum permissible limit, and this is confirmed by data from the professional route and sanitary and hygienic characteristics, there is no need to conduct an assessment risk to link the disease with the profession. This applies equally to any disease included in the National List.

It should be clarified here that when the list of occupational diseases was historically formed, not only in Russia, but also abroad, including generalized international experience, such a strict limitation as at least 80% of the “etiological share” was never used. In all cases, it was a question of a high probability of developing a particular disease in workers exposed to relevant harmful factors.

It is quite obvious that individual sensitivity to the factor is different, in addition, the likelihood of developing an occupational disease significantly depends on the level and exposure, therefore, with varying degrees of exceeding hygienic standards in different people, diseases can develop with different work experience. In other words, someone will develop an occupational disease even if the MPC or MPL is exceeded within class 3.1, while someone will not develop it even if it is exceeded beyond class 3.3 (the latter, by the way, does not mean that the employee will not experience other violations health). In all cases of development of the corresponding disease, if this nosology is included in the list, it should be recognized as occupational, and no additional epidemiological studies are required to substantiate the high etiological share of the damaging factor in its formation. In Russia, the process of identifying occupational diseases is already quite complicated and there is no need to complicate it further with an assessment of occupational risk.

To strengthen the component of evidence-based medicine in the procedure for diagnosing occupational diseases and examining their connection with the profession, it is much more rational to improve work in the field of relevant medical standards.

The use of risk assessment methodology to study the incidence of work-related diseases, for example, arterial hypertension for locomotive crew drivers or civil aviation pilots, in our opinion, introduces even greater confusion into the current situation.

Even with a very high etiological proportion obtained when assessing the relative risk, the disease will not be recognized as an insured event if it is not on the National List of Occupational Diseases. At the same time, the same diseases in some cases will be recognized as “caused”, in others - not, and in professional groups with similar working conditions, since the methodology is initially focused on calculating the relative risk without a clear definition of the population or group in relation to which it calculated.

Until the phenomenon of work-related diseases has a legal status, and the methodology is not clarified in relation to what the risk is calculated, the application of this risk assessment methodology to occupation-related diseases, as well as vice versa, the calculation is great. the risk level based on their analysis will not have practical application.

Misunderstanding of the place and role of risk theory also occurs because, unfortunately, from the moment the concept of risk was introduced in the Labor Code of the Russian Federation and to this day, the conceptual apparatus used remains blurred and, more importantly, there is no standardization of the goals and objectives of the procedure for assessing professional risk.

In our opinion, the main goal of assessing occupational risk is the formation of a socially and economically justified effective occupational risk management system, the ultimate goal of which should be to minimize the risk of employee health problems in the workplace.

In Russia, currently only one methodology has legal status, developed for the purposes of compulsory social insurance and based on the distribution of activities into more than 30 classes, based on the specific total costs incurred in the past year in connection with occupational diseases and accidents at work. This model can be classified as a group of economic models. Obviously, this indicator of occupational risk is a group (industry) one and does not contain information about damaging factors in the labor process and their significance for an individual worker.

This technique allows, and even then with large reservations, to solve only one of the problems of risk assessment - justification for the calculation of insurance payments. At the same time, the methodology equalizes all organizations in the industry or type of activity in terms of risk, regardless of actual working conditions.

However, the current level of occupational diseases in the country is unreasonably low and does not reflect the actual occupational risk. Moreover, in the last decade there has been a pronounced trend towards its further decrease, which is becoming threatening, indicating the desire of society to eliminate occupational diseases as a social phenomenon (see Fig. 1).

Rice. 1. Dynamics and trend of the level of occupational diseases in the Russian Federation,
since 2000,
per 10 thousand population

The share of workers who were diagnosed with occupational diseases for the first time is less than 0.5% of the number of people employed in hazardous working conditions (see Table 2).

Table 2. Correlation of detected occupational diseases with the number of people employed in hazardous conditions
labor in the Russian Federation in 2008

For comparison, we present data on the level of occupational diseases in European countries (see Fig. 2). Compared to developed European countries, the level of occupational diseases in Russia is at least an order of magnitude lower. At the same time, no one doubts that our working conditions are significantly worse.

Rice. 2. The level of occupational diseases in some European countries and Russia in 2009,
per 100 thousand population

A similar trend is observed in the dynamics of industrial accidents. Their absolute number and frequency have been steadily decreasing over the past 20 years against the background of an increase in the value of the negative correlation coefficient with the proportion of jobs with working conditions that do not meet hygienic requirements (by 2009, p. = - 0.65).

All this led to the fact that the methodology for assessing professional risk adopted by the Federal Social Insurance Fund of the Russian Federation turned out to be untenable. The vast majority of economic activities over 20 years have shifted towards the lower risk primary classes.

According to the level of professional risk, according to the methodology of the Federal Social Insurance Fund of the Russian Federation, types of economic activity are distributed as follows. For 54.5% of them it is low, for 17.9% - below average, for 14.2% - average, for 7.7% - above average, for 2.7% - high, for 2.9% - very tall. Suffice it to say that the first class of minimal risk includes: production of natural gas and gas condensate, subway activities, transportation of oil and petroleum products through pipelines, activities in healthcare, sports, general and secondary education, activities of internal affairs bodies, as well as wholesale and retail trade, insurance, government activities, etc.

All of the above, firstly, led to a sharp reduction in insurance payments; secondly, it has become one of the factors in discrediting the entire system of occupational safety and health of workers, since with such low risks, any expensive occupational safety measures do not seem justified; thirdly, it required the development of a unified universal methodology for assessing occupational risk, which would make it possible to level out the current situation with the levels of occupational diseases and occupational injuries in the country.

In 2009, a team of authors led by Academician of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences N.F. Izmerov developed such a methodology and received the name Methodology for assessing individual occupational risk (IPR), which allows, in single-number terms, to obtain a reasonable idea of ​​the occupational risk for a particular employee, taking into account all the features of his actual working conditions and health status.

The a priori component of the model includes an assessment of working conditions according to 14 factors, the likelihood of injury in the workplace, the degree of protection of personal protective equipment, age, work experience in hazardous working conditions, as well as an integral indicator of the employee’s health.

The posterior component of the model is based on taking into account the absolute number of occupational diseases and accidents at work identified in the past year for this employee, as well as other workers employed in the same workplace or in similar workplaces.

The methodology is based on two streams of information - based on the results of workplace certification and periodic medical examinations - and can be used to assess occupational risk in any type of organization. In this case, the actual working conditions are initially assessed in accordance with R 2.2.2006-05, but additionally, indicators of the risk of injury in the workplace and the provision of employee PPE are used, and then a single-digit integral indicator of working conditions (IOUT) is calculated.

The methodology provides for the possibility of obtaining group risk assessments for structural divisions of an organization and professional groups, as well as for the organization as a whole, which are calculated as arithmetic averages from the IPR values ​​of persons included in the group (organization). As a result of the calculations, a dimensionless single-number value of professional risk is obtained, which is qualitatively assessed in six gradations from low to very high (see Table 3).

Table 3. Scale of the integral indicator of the individual level
professional risk

We conducted a comparative analysis of the use of three methods for assessing occupational risk: the Finnish model recommended by the ILO, the model contained in the manual R 2.2.1766-03, and the IPR methodology - in order to identify their advantages and disadvantages and determine the list of tasks for which their use is optimal.

Occupational risk– the likelihood of harm to health as a result of exposure to harmful and (or) hazardous production factors when an employee performs duties under an employment contract or in other cases established by the Labor Code and other Federal Laws (Article 209 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

Occupational Risk Management– a set of interrelated measures that are elements of the occupational safety and health management system (hereinafter referred to as the OSHMS) and include measures to identify, assess and reduce levels of occupational risks. In essence, this is a mechanism to ensure safety and improve working conditions at the enterprise.

The level of professional risk characterizes:

• probability of occurrence of insured events (frequency for a given professional group of workers over a certain period of time);
• types and duration of health damage (loss of ability to work);
• a set of compensation payments, medical and rehabilitation services required for a specific professional group of workers.

Requirements for the occupational health and safety risk management system

Let's consider the current requirements for assessing the likelihood of negative events occurring:

1) SOUTH. The class of working conditions is nothing more than the risk of an employee developing an occupational disease. The mechanism for conducting a special assessment is close to the classical method of risk assessment. What is common is the following:

• Hazard identification;
• Justification, planning and financing of measures to improve working conditions;
• Informing employees about working conditions;
• Accumulation of statistical data on working conditions;
• Including characteristics of working conditions in the employment contract;
• Teamwork (committee on SOUT, assessment team when assessing risks).

The main difference between the SOUT and risk assessment is the static nature of the SOUT (the frequency of its implementation is once every 5 years). However, when assessing risks, the results of the assessment system must be taken into account.

2) Checklist No. 31 verifies that the employer has an occupational safety and health management system (OSMS). Contains two items:

• The employer has an OSMS Regulation approved by order;
• The employer has an OSH Policy.

According to the Order of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation dated 03/01/2012 No. 181n “On approval of the Standard List of measures annually implemented by the employer to improve conditions and occupational safety and reduce the levels of occupational risks,” this list includes “Carrying out SOUT, assessing the levels of occupational risks.”

Order of the Ministry of Labor of the Russian Federation dated August 19, 2016 No. 438n approved the Standard Regulations on OSMS - a regulatory legal act, the mandatory requirements of which are subject to unconditional implementation. According to this document (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), the procedure for managing professional risks is part of the organization's OSMS.

When developing an OSMS regulation, the employer must be guided by the Model OSHS Regulation, the clauses of which regulate the risk assessment procedure:

• The employer has a documented procedure for managing professional risks (clause 33);
• Availability of a list of identified hazards that pose a threat to the life and health of workers (clause 34);
• The presence in the procedure of describing the method (methods) for assessing the level of professional risks associated with identified hazards (clause 37);
• The employer has a list of measures to eliminate or reduce levels of occupational risks (clause 39).

OHSMS implies the existence of a procedure for assessing occupational risk and organizing work on occupational safety in accordance with the identified hazards.

In addition, a number of national standards of the Russian Federation regulate the principles and procedure for risk assessment:

• GOST R 12.0.010-2009 “SSBT. SUOT. Hazard identification and risk assessment”;
• GOST R 51897-2011/ISO Guide 73:2009 “Risk management. Terms and definitions";
• GOST R ISO 31000-2010 “Risk management. Principles and Guidance”;
• GOST R ISO/IEC 31010-2011 “Risk management. Risk assessment methods".

Risk assessment procedure

Risk assessment is a structured process that identifies hazards, determines the likelihood of hazardous events occurring, and analyzes the possible consequences to decide whether to treat the risk.

Risk assessment allows you to answer the following basic questions:

1. what events might happen;
2. what are the consequences of these events;
3. what is the probability of their occurrence;
4. what factors can reduce adverse consequences or the likelihood of hazardous situations;
5. the level of risk is acceptable or further processing is required.

The assessment of professional risks can be presented as a sequence of the following actions:

• Visit of an expert to the enterprise;
• Familiarization with workplaces and production processes;
• Development of individual checklists for the department (workplace);
• Conducting a risk audit;
• Preparation of risk identification cards;
• Development of an action plan to reduce risks.

Risk assessment methods

Methods for identifying hazards, incl. in technogenic systems, can be divided into direct and indirect.

Direct risk assessment methods based on statistics. Applicable only where such statistics were collected - to the industry as a whole. But even for a large enterprise, the method does not work - just because the trouble has not yet occurred, it does not follow that the risk is minimal.
Indirect risk assessment methods include: audit of workplace organization, employee survey, safety behavior audit and so on.

Using a checklist when assessing risks

For the convenience of risk assessment, it is customary to use checklists. At the same time, the list of hazards defined by the Regulations is not exhaustive - it should not be used as a ready-made checklist.

An illiterate checklist will negate all the work on risk assessment. Often in practice, a questionnaire is sent to the head of the department with the following items: “Has training been carried out?”, “PPE issued?”, “Is there a risk of injury?”, “Are the rules followed?” etc. The foreman answers affirmatively to all points and returns the questionnaire back. The specialist who received it is satisfied with the low level of risk. This approach has nothing to do with true risk assessment.

Even if the head of a department is aware of his role in ensuring safe working conditions and has sufficient qualifications, in practice it is impossible for him to assess the real level of rice at his facility. The reason for this is a number of psychological and professional barriers.

Audit Mechanisms

To conduct a competent assessment, an outside person is required - a full-time employee or an expert specially hired for this purpose. His primary tasks:

• inspect the workspace, organization of workplaces;
• study the tool used;
• become familiar with production processes.

It is important to understand that while working “under supervision”, employees will demonstrate ideally safe behavior. Here you should pay attention to details: a sudden change or stop of work or a prompt search for personal protective equipment when an auditor appears.

However, even an expert without the participation of the organizers of the production process may miss certain options for performing work in the department. It is the survey of workers and their managers that contributes to an accurate risk assessment. But questions should be formulated correctly - instead of “Have you completed the training?” ask “When was the last briefing?”, “List the labor protection requirements before starting work.” If the answers about the date of the briefing differ from the log or the employees do not remember the basic rules, the conclusion follows that the process is formal.

By analyzing the totality of the responses received, we can draw a conclusion about the level of risk in the department.

The visual risk assessment process is characterized by the following examples:

• Tools used in the workplace (for example, knives for unpacking boxes), although they are relatively the same cost, pose completely different levels of danger to the worker.
• Loose wires are one of the leading causes of falls in the office.
• A cluttered workplace and lack of protective elements (protective shields) significantly increase the likelihood of injury.
• Violations of the rules for carrying out loading and unloading operations put at risk not only the employee who committed the violation, but also other participants in the work process.
• The lack of fencing around the work site increases the risk of a vehicle hitting a worker.
• The lack of regulated protective equipment during work is a gross violation of labor safety requirements.

Drawing up risk identification cards

The risk map form is being developed and should include the following main points:

1) Production process

The process, as a result of which an increase in risk is possible, may be called: “Moving in space to carry out work activities.”

2) Dangerous event

May have options (using the example of “fall risk”):

• formation of ice, ice;
• the formation of condensation on the tiles due to temperature differences;
• slippery floor surface;
• flooring defects;
• loose wires;
• high threshold;
• non-use of safety shoes.

3) Risk management measures

Existing measures to reduce risk are listed and their effectiveness is assessed.

4) Probability and possible severity of injury as a result of the occurrence of the analyzed event.

For this assessment, the “matrix method” is acceptable.

The identified and described risks are summarized in general risk identification cards for departments and for the enterprise as a whole, and are presented in table form:

The main thing after drawing up risk maps is to develop measures to reduce risks. First of all, for high and medium level risks.

Difference from special assessment of working conditions:

• the risk assessment procedure is not strictly regulated;
• there are no requirements for it to be carried out by specially accredited companies, whose specialists have appropriate training and accreditation and are responsible for their expert opinions;
• the burden on the employer in the form of payment for risk assessment services is not compensated by a reduction in the insurance premium rate both in the case of low risks and when the employer takes sufficient measures to reduce them.

Risk Assessment Perspectives

Risk assessment is one of the important elements of a modern management system, but until now it has not been properly stated in legislation. For this reason, a formal approach to the procedure for assessing occupational risks is currently widespread in practice.

It is necessary to distinguish between the assessment of professional risks and the risk-based approach that Rostrud has been applying when conducting scheduled and unscheduled inspections of employers since 2018 as part of the Federal Labor Supervision.