Before labor or CTS benefits, safety and health at work is more important. This aspect is a basic prerequisite for any company, not because it meets the minimum conditions for workers, not only endangered his life and health, but also the sustainability of their families.
While the standard of OSH can be complex for companies, since it generates obligations, administrative burdens, hiring people, expenses, etc., companies should see it as an investment in the sense that it seeks the prevention of occupational accidents and diseases. All protocols, medical examinations, regulations, training, meetings, etc., will help create a stronger culture of prevention, which ultimately benefits the organization, as a company with greater safety culture is more productive.
In addition, when compared with international safety certifications, we see that it’s within established standards. That’s why, for transnational or Peruvian companies that have these certifications, the change has been minimal, almost imperceptible. In the mining and construction sectors, for example, thanks to the very nature of the activities performed, has been giving more regulation in this area so that in any way the adjustments are going to be extreme.
The companies themselves are requiring investment, radical changes and even cultural changes are engaged in trade or services and that, to say the least, were delayed or “zero” regarding OSH. These companies should realize that what looks the OSH Act is that: employees do not run the risk of accidents or illnesses, and if these can give the effect the smallest possible, both for the worker and the company. In addition, it should be noted that this rule generates administrative fines, compensation for damages and criminal liability of up to 10 years of deprivation of liberty.
For example, one of the most debated points, and weathered, it has been the duty of forming a committee of SST within the company, following international standards that indicate that these issues are of shared responsibility. In this regard, the employer should consider three things:
- The improved safety and health is the emerging dialogue of the two parties and not one that is imposed, it is much better to have obtained the opinion and active participation of workers. That, as indicated by the standard, only be achieved in a joint committee where the number of employee representatives and the company is the same.
- It should be seen as an advantage the fact that the security system is better and much safer thanks to the contribution of the workers, because in the end they are the ones who know what the greatest threats to their work are.
- When all the security system implemented by the committee formed by the workers themselves and the responsibility becomes shared and decentralized employer. A fine example that allows you to see the consequences of such a committee would be: if there were an accident at work due to a poor safety protocol, approved by the employer only, the latter would be 100% responsible. But if the protocol was approved by the safety committee composed of representatives of the workers and the company, the responsibility is shared. This third reason, though not the most important, can get companies be persuaded to install and implement the committee.
Do not forget that money is not at stake, but something much more important: security, health and lives of workers and their families, which is the sole responsibility of the employer and the worker works under a regime subordinated “employed “. Under this regime, and the employer enjoys the fruits, results and profits of the business, you must assume all risks and responsibilities thereof.