1

#standardays

ETUC – the voice of European workers

Christophe Hauert Advisor

•  ETUCmembershipandorganisa4on•  ETUCac4oninstandardisa4on

•  Background,objec4ves,func4oning

•  Priorityareas•  Relevanceofstandardsfortradeunions•  Achievements…

•  …atpolicylevel

•  …attechnicallevel

Outline

2

•  Foundedin1973•  Represents 90 trade union organisa4ons in 39 countries,plus10EuropeanTradeUnionFedera4ons

•  Addressingawide rangeof issues:economicgovernance,social dialogue and industrial rela4ons, social rights andEuropean labour law, migra4on, training, sustainabledevelopment,(…),and…

•  …since2015,«ETUCSTANDARDISATIONproject»

TheEuropeanTradeUnionConfedera=on

TheEuropeanTradeUnionConfedera=on-organisa=on

EXECUTIVECOMMITTEE(everyaffiliate,44mesperyear)

STEERINGCOMMITTEE(84mesperyear)

CONGRESS (once in 4 years)‏

GENERALSECRETARY&Secretariat

19ETUC«thema4c»permanentcommi_ee

(everyaffiliate)->ETUCSTANDRDISATIONCOMMITTEE

3

•  New Approach (1985), Machine direc4ve (1989) <->TUTB/BTS(todayETUI)

•  Newregula4on1025/2012onEuropeanstandardisa4on

•  Extensionoflegalframeworktoincludeservicesstandards•  Provision for inclusiveness / EC financial support toEuropean societal stakeholders (i.e. workers, consumers,environmentalprotec4on)

→  EC-ETUCFrameworkPartnershipAgreement(4+2y)→  ETUC standardisa=on ac=on on services and

industrialadvancement(budget~200’000€)

ETUCSTANDproject-background

ETUCSTANDProject-objec=ves

•  Par4cipa4onatpolicyandtechnicallevel

•  Networking, capacity building and trainingac4vi4es

•  Informa4onandcommunica4on(e.g.ETUCstandardisa4onnewsle_er)

To strengthen tradeunion interven0on to represent socialinterestsinthestandardisa0onprocessatEuropeanlevel

4

ETUCSTANDproject-overview

TheCENgovernance

Coordina=onGroup

Strategy

Planning

Programming

DG Growth

Observers in TCs and WGs

ETUC Policy officer

ETUC Standardisation Committee

Advancedmanufacturing-  InternetofThingsà

-  ETSI/TCMachinetoMachineCommunica4ons-  Bio-basedproductsà

-  CEN/TC19–Gaseousandliquidfuels(…)-  CEN/TC249–Plas4cs-  CEN/TC276–Surfaceac4veagents-  CEN/TC411–Bio-basedproducts

IntelligentTransportSystemsà-  ETSI/TCIntelligentTransportSystems-  CEN/TC278–IntelligenttransportsystemsCEN/TC319–MaintenanceCEN/TC348–FacilityManagementCEN/TC447–HorizontalServicesStandardsCEN/TC449–Qualityofcareforelderlypeople

CommiSeeonStandards

Priori=es

Services:•  Maintenance(CENTC319)•  Facilitymanagement(CENTC348/ISOTC267)•  Horizontalservicesstandards(CENTC447)•  Qualityofcareforelderlypeople(CENTC449)

Industrialadvancement:•  M2M(ETSI)•  Intelligenttransportsystems(CENTC278/ETSI)•  Bio-basedproducts(CENTC411)

5

•  Healthandsafetyatwork•  Organisa4onofproduc4on• Marketreferen4al

•  Levelplayingfield

•  Quality>price

•  Industrialcompe44vetoolì  Extendingscopeofstandardisa4onì  GrowingroleinEuropeanandinterna4onal

regula4ons

Relevanceofstandardsforworkers

Achievements–policylevel

-  PartnershipagreementwithCEN

-  Crea4onofETUCStandardisa4oncommi_ee(21countriesrepresented)

-  Adop4onofETUCResolu4onsonstandardisa4on

-  SignatureoftheJIS,numerouspolicyinputs(IR,CoS,EESCopinionAUWP2016,etc.)

6

Achievements–technicallevel

•  ETUCinvolvedsince2015…

•  Developmentofexper4se,“technicalcomments”:•  Maintenance(CENTC319)•  Facilitymanagement(CENTC348/ISOTC267)•  M2M(ETSI)•  Intelligenttransportsystems(CENTC278/ETSI)•  Horizontalservicesstandards(CENTC447)•  Qualityofcareforelderlypeople(CENTC449)

•  TheFeedbackMethod

ThefeedbackmethodDesignedtocollectthecontribu4onsofworkersforthereconstruc4onandunderstandingoftherealworkac=vityinordertoimprovetechnicalstandards,opera4ngprocedures,trainingprogrammes,etc.

TECHNICAL REPORT

RAPPORT TECHNIQUE

TECHNISCHER BERICHT

CEN/TR 16710-1

December 2015

ICS 13.110; 13.180

English Version

Ergonomics methods - Part 1: Feedback method - A

method to understand how end users perform their work

with machines

Feedbackmethode - Eine Methode zum Verständnis

wie Endnutzer ihre Arbeit mit Machinen durchführen

This Technical Report was approved by CEN on 17 November 2015. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee CEN/TC

122. CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,

Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,

Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and

United Kingdom.

EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION

C OMITÉ E URO PÉEN DE N ORMA LI SA TIO N

EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG

CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels

© 2015 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved

worldwide for CEN national Members.

Ref. No. CEN/TR 16710-1:2015 E

© NBN - Single User Licence: European Trade Union Institute, 7201600540

Ø  AdoptedasCEN/TR16710-1

Ø  Improvedstandards

7

Thefeedbackmethod

It is important to note that the experts lea-ding the discussion allow the workers toact as key players in evaluating their ownworking environment. The experts’ roleconsists in supplying information, spee-ding up the participants’ contribution tothe reconstruction of the job, and guidingthe users’ evaluations of the safety issuesand possible preventive action.

Written WG documentand its validationAt the end of the process, the researcherstransfer the results onto a "legible copy" ofthe Feedback grid and deliver it to everyparticipant for their validation and/or forany corrections/additions. This step isessential, not least so that the more reticentmembers have an opportunity to contri-bute their opinions and suggestions. Theindications provided by users will be adop-ted and marked in the final report. Theconsolidated and validated WG reportrepresents a basic document that can befine-tuned to better highlight lessons lear-ned and suggestions.

Project overviewand final technical reportThe final phase of the Feedback Methodconsists in the drafting of the project over-view and the final technical report. The pro-ject overview describes all the different pro-ject phases and outcomes, from the assem-bling of the machine dossier to the consoli-dation and validation of the WG report.

Afterwards the researchers draft a synthesisof the WG report, drawing together andpresenting the prevention indications andsuggestions that emerged from the WGs,in order to facilitate the transition fromwords to deeds. This final technical reportis structured in such a way that its contentis addressed to:

• standard-setters, for modification andimprovement of the standard on thespecific issues that emerged from theWG (i.e. ergonomics, maintainability,operating modes);

• designers and manufacturers, in orderto assess the feasibility of the WG sug-gestions and compare them with thecurrent state of the art;

• employers/users, so that they can improveand manage maintenance operations,provide effective safety training andadequate job organisation; in order toimprove the purchase and safe incorpora-tion of work equipment into the com-pany-specific environment;

• workers, so that they pay careful atten-tion to the safety indications suppliedby the manufacturers and by the usersthemselves.

This final technical report therefore beco-mes the centrepiece of the job carried outand constitutes a technical synthesis of thecontributions made by users both duringthe inspections and within the workinggroup debates. The concluding report is asynthesis of the suggestions to be addressedto all stakeholders involved in machinerysafety issues: standard-setters, manufactu-rers, employers, workers’ representatives,inspection bodies, etc.

ResultsThe following table summarises the mainresults obtained by applying the “Feed-back” method to forklift trucks.

P A G E 6

Tasksequence

Operatingconditions

(for execution oftask)

Knowledge(necessary for

optimal executionof task)

Risk associatedwith taskexecution

Suggestions forprevention

Job phase

Fig. 1 Table used to record the job reconstruction carried out by the working group

Main proposals and suggestions - Forklift trucks Technical standard

Improvement of active and passive means from overturning risks EN 1726-1:1998; clauseImprovement of devices which keep the driver in his seat. 4.1.11, 5.2.3, 5.6.3.4, 5.7,

5.8, 7.2.2, 7.3

Improvement of battery handling methods. EN 1726-1:1998;Harmonisation of travelling and stopping control devices (placing and typology) EN 1726-1:1998; clausewith layout used in cars. 1.7.4, 5.4.2, 5.4.2.1

EN 281:1988; clause 7

Harmonisation of control levers for every type of forklift truck. Control devicesmust be designed so that, where a risk is involved, the desired effect cannot be EN 1726-1:1998; clauseachieved without an intentional operation. 5.4.4, 5.4.5

Fastening and insulation of battery bonnet. EN 1726-1:1998; clause5.5.3, 5.7

Improvement of access to operating position. Compulsory handles. EN 1726-1:1998;clause 5.7.2

It is important to note that the experts lea-ding the discussion allow the workers toact as key players in evaluating their ownworking environment. The experts’ roleconsists in supplying information, spee-ding up the participants’ contribution tothe reconstruction of the job, and guidingthe users’ evaluations of the safety issuesand possible preventive action.

Written WG documentand its validationAt the end of the process, the researcherstransfer the results onto a "legible copy" ofthe Feedback grid and deliver it to everyparticipant for their validation and/or forany corrections/additions. This step isessential, not least so that the more reticentmembers have an opportunity to contri-bute their opinions and suggestions. Theindications provided by users will be adop-ted and marked in the final report. Theconsolidated and validated WG reportrepresents a basic document that can befine-tuned to better highlight lessons lear-ned and suggestions.

Project overviewand final technical reportThe final phase of the Feedback Methodconsists in the drafting of the project over-view and the final technical report. The pro-ject overview describes all the different pro-ject phases and outcomes, from the assem-bling of the machine dossier to the consoli-dation and validation of the WG report.

Afterwards the researchers draft a synthesisof the WG report, drawing together andpresenting the prevention indications andsuggestions that emerged from the WGs,in order to facilitate the transition fromwords to deeds. This final technical reportis structured in such a way that its contentis addressed to:

• standard-setters, for modification andimprovement of the standard on thespecific issues that emerged from theWG (i.e. ergonomics, maintainability,operating modes);

• designers and manufacturers, in orderto assess the feasibility of the WG sug-gestions and compare them with thecurrent state of the art;

• employers/users, so that they can improveand manage maintenance operations,provide effective safety training andadequate job organisation; in order toimprove the purchase and safe incorpora-tion of work equipment into the com-pany-specific environment;

• workers, so that they pay careful atten-tion to the safety indications suppliedby the manufacturers and by the usersthemselves.

This final technical report therefore beco-mes the centrepiece of the job carried outand constitutes a technical synthesis of thecontributions made by users both duringthe inspections and within the workinggroup debates. The concluding report is asynthesis of the suggestions to be addressedto all stakeholders involved in machinerysafety issues: standard-setters, manufactu-rers, employers, workers’ representatives,inspection bodies, etc.

ResultsThe following table summarises the mainresults obtained by applying the “Feed-back” method to forklift trucks.

P A G E 6

Tasksequence

Operatingconditions

(for execution oftask)

Knowledge(necessary for

optimal executionof task)

Risk associatedwith taskexecution

Suggestions forprevention

Job phase

Fig. 1 Table used to record the job reconstruction carried out by the working group

Main proposals and suggestions - Forklift trucks Technical standard

Improvement of active and passive means from overturning risks EN 1726-1:1998; clauseImprovement of devices which keep the driver in his seat. 4.1.11, 5.2.3, 5.6.3.4, 5.7,

5.8, 7.2.2, 7.3

Improvement of battery handling methods. EN 1726-1:1998;Harmonisation of travelling and stopping control devices (placing and typology) EN 1726-1:1998; clausewith layout used in cars. 1.7.4, 5.4.2, 5.4.2.1

EN 281:1988; clause 7

Harmonisation of control levers for every type of forklift truck. Control devicesmust be designed so that, where a risk is involved, the desired effect cannot be EN 1726-1:1998; clauseachieved without an intentional operation. 5.4.4, 5.4.5

Fastening and insulation of battery bonnet. EN 1726-1:1998; clause5.5.3, 5.7

Improvement of access to operating position. Compulsory handles. EN 1726-1:1998;clause 5.7.2

ThankyouforyouraSen=on!standardisa=on.etuc.org

standards@etuc.org

ETUC is supported financially by the European Union & EFTA