Šidagytė Rasa, Eglīte Maija, Salmi Anne, Šorytė Dovilė, Vanadziņš Ivars, Hopsu Leila, Lerssi-Uskelin Jaana, Bulotaitė Laima, Kozlova Lāsma, Lakiša Svetlana, Vičaitė Sigita
Occupational Health Centre, Institute of Hygiene, Didžioji str. 22, Vilnius, Lithuana.
Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Riga Stradins University, Dzirciema str. 16, Riga, Latvia.
J Occup Med Toxicol. 2015 May 10;10:18. doi: 10.1186/s12995-015-0060-y. eCollection 2015.
This article investigates the legal database and theoretical basis of workplace health promotion (WHP) in three European countries: Finland, Latvia and Lithuania, and aims to find insights into effective WHP implementation.
In November 2013, a stakeholders' survey was carried out. The questionnaire included questions about legal documents and non-legislative measures relevant to WHP, institutions and other bodies/organizations working in the field, WHP conception/definition, and implementation of WHP activities according to the enterprises' size.
Only Finland has adopted a specific law on occupational health care (separate from occupational safety). ILO conventions No. 161 (Occupational Health Services Convention) and No. 187 (Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention) are ratified only in Finland. In Finland, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health acts as one ministry, while two Baltic countries have two separate ministries (one for health and another for social affairs). None of the countries has legally approved a definition of WHP. Latvia and Lithuania tend to separate WHP from other activities, whereas Finland integrates WHP into other occupational health and safety elements.
Finland has a more extensive legislative and organizational background to WHP than Latvia and Lithuania. In defining WHP, all the countries refer to the Luxembourg Declaration on Workplace Health Promotion in the European Union. Finland's practice of integrating WHP into other occupational health and safety elements is important.
本文调查了芬兰、拉脱维亚和立陶宛这三个欧洲国家工作场所健康促进(WHP)的法律数据库和理论基础,旨在深入了解WHP的有效实施情况。
2013年11月开展了一项利益相关者调查。问卷包括有关与WHP相关的法律文件和非立法措施、该领域工作的机构及其他团体/组织、WHP的概念/定义以及根据企业规模开展WHP活动的问题。
只有芬兰通过了一项关于职业卫生保健的专门法律(与职业安全分开)。国际劳工组织第161号公约(职业卫生服务公约)和第187号公约(职业安全与卫生促进框架公约)仅在芬兰获得批准。在芬兰,社会事务与卫生部作为一个部门开展工作,而两个波罗的海国家有两个独立的部(一个负责卫生,另一个负责社会事务)。没有一个国家在法律上批准WHP的定义。拉脱维亚和立陶宛倾向于将WHP与其他活动分开,而芬兰将WHP纳入其他职业健康与安全要素之中。
与拉脱维亚和立陶宛相比,芬兰在WHP方面拥有更广泛的立法和组织背景。在界定WHP时,所有国家均提及欧盟《工作场所健康促进卢森堡宣言》。芬兰将WHP纳入其他职业健康与安全要素的做法很重要。