Archiv für April, 2015

Betriebliche Gesundheitsprojekte

Dienstag, 21. April 2015 - 21:08

http://www.gruenewald.cc/uploads/media/Magisterarbeit_Gruenewald.pdf (2010-11):

Gründe für das Scheitern von betrieblichen Gesundheitsprojekten
Magisterarbeit von: Christian Grünewald

[...]

Inhaltsverzeichnis
1 STATISTISCHE DATEN UND PROGNOSEN 1
1.1 EINLEITUNG 1
1.2 KRITERIEN FÜR GESUNDHEITSPOLITISCHE ENTSCHEIDUNGEN UND MAßNAHMEN
BEZÜGLICH GESUNDHEIT AM ARBEITSPLATZ 2
1.2.1 DEMOGRAPHISCHER WANDEL 2
1.2.1.1 Fazit 6
1.2.2 ARBEITSBEDINGTE ERKRANKUNGEN 6
1.2.2.1 Fazit 11
1.2.3 FEHLZEITEN 11
1.2.3.1 Fazit 14
1.2.4 INVALIDITÄT 14
1.2.4.1 Fazit 16
1.3 RESÜMEE 16
2 HISTORISCHE ENTWICKLUNG UND GESETZLICHE RAHMENBEDINGUNGEN DER
BGF 20
2.1 EINLEITUNG 20
2.2 MEILENSTEINE DER BGF 21
2.2.1 SUNDSVALL 24
2.2.2 JAKARTA-DEKLARATION 25
2.2.3 LUXEMBURGER DEKLARATION 25
2.2.4 CARDIFF MEMORANDUM 26
2.2.5 BARCELONA DEKLARATION 26
2.2.6 BANGKOK CHARTA 26
2.2.7 AKTIONSPROGRAMME 26
2.3 BETRIEBLICHE GESUNDHEITSFÖRDERUNG IN ÖSTERREICH 27
2.3.1 HISTORISCHER ENTWICKLUNG 27
2.3.2 ÖSTERREICHISCHES NETZWERK FÜR BETRIEBLICHE GESUNDHEITSFÖRDERUNG (OENBGF) 30
2.3.3 FONDS GESUNDES ÖSTERREICH (FGÖ) 30
2.3.4 GESUNDHEIT ÖSTERREICH GMBH (GÖG) 31
2.3.5 AKTIVITÄTEN AUF SEITEN DER VERSICHERUNGEN 31
2.4 RÜCKBLICK DER BGF 32
2.4.1 BGF-RÜCKBLICK DEUTSCHLAND 32
2.4.2 BGF-RÜCKBLICK ÖSTERREICH 34
2.4.2.1 Auszüge aus Bilanzberichten 34
2.4.3 BGF-RÜCKBLICK DER ENWHP 38
2.4.4 FAZIT 39
3 GESUNDHEITSFÖRDERUNG 40
3.1 ENTWICKLUNG 40
3.2 DER GESUNDHEITSBEGRIFF 41
3.2.1 DIE SICHTWEISE DER WHO 41
3.2.2 OBJEKTIVER VS. SUBJEKTIVER GESUNDHEITSBEGRIFF 42
3.2.3 DAS SOZIOPSYCHOSOMATISCHE MODELL 42
3.2.4 DIE NEUE WHO-DEFINITION 43
3.3 PAHTOGEN VS. SALUTOGEN 44
3.3.1 PATHOGENESE 44
3.3.2 SALUTOGENESE 44
3.3.3 PARADIGMENWECHSEL 44
3.4 RESSOURCEN 45
3.4.1 RESSOURCENARTEN 46
3.4.2 SOZIALE UNTERSTÜTZUNG 47
3.4.3 KOHÄRENZGEFÜHL 48
3.4.4 STRESS 48
3.5 KONZEPT DER GESUNDHEITSFÖRDERUNG 51
3.5.1 DEFINITION 51
3.6 PRÄVENTION VS. GESUNDHEITSFÖRDERUNG 53
3.6.1 PRÄVENTION 54
3.6.2 KLASSIFIKATION 55
3.6.3 VERHALTENSPRÄVENTION VS. VERHÄLTNISPRÄVENTION 58
3.6.4 INTERVENTIONSFORMEN DER PRIMÄRPRÄVENTION 59
3.6.4.1 Individuell ansetzende Prävention 60
3.6.4.2 Setting basierte Primärprävention 60
3.6.4.3 Gruppen oder bevölkerungsbezogene Primärprävention 61
3.7 SETTING-ANSATZ 61
3.7.1 ENTWICKLUNG DES SETTING-ANSATZES 61
3.7.2 DEFINITION 62
3.7.3 VORTEILE DES SETTINGS FÜR DIE GESUNDHEITSFÖRDERUNG 65
4 BETRIEBLICHE GESUNDHEITSPOLITIK (BGP) 66
4.1 ALLGEMEINES 67
4.1.1 DEFINITION 67
4.1.2 AUFGABEN DER BGP 67
4.1.3 UMSETZUNG DER BGP 68
4.1.4 AUFBAU DER BGP 69
4.1.5 SOZIAL- UND HUMANKAPITAL 69
4.2 ARBEITNEHMERSCHUTZ 71
4.2.1 DEFINITION 71
4.2.2 ZIEL DES ASCHG 72
4.2.3 ARBEITNEHMERSCHUTZ VS. BETRIEBLICHER GESUNDHEITSFÖRDERUNG 72
4.2.4 SICHERHEITS- UND GESUNDHEITSMANAGEMENTSYSTEM „SGM“ 74
4.2.4.1 Definition 74
4.3 BETRIEBLICHE GESUNDHEITSFÖRDERUNG (BGF) 75
4.3.1 BEGRIFFSBESTIMMUNG 76
4.3.1.1 Ziel 76
4.3.1.2 Leitlinien 77
4.3.1.3 Qualitätskriterien 77
4.4 BETRIEBLICHE GESUNDHEITSFÖRDERUNG (BGF) VS. BETRIEBLICHES
GESUNDHEITSMANAGEMENT (BGM) 79
4.4.1 UNTERSCHIEDLICHE DEFINITIONEN ZU BGF UND BGM 79
4.4.1.1 Der Begriff „Betriebliche Gesundheitsförderung“ 79
4.4.1.2 Der Begriff „Betriebliches Gesundheitsmanagement“ 80
4.4.2 FAZIT 81
4.5 HUMAN-RESSOURCE-MANAGEMENT (HRM) UND PERSONALENTWICKLUNG (PE) 81
4.5.1 GEMEINSAMKEITEN: 81
4.5.2 ZIEL DER PE 82
4.5.3 DEFINITION VON PE 82
4.6 BETRIEBLICHE GESUNDHEITSFÖRDERUNG IM SINNE DER ORGANISATIONSENTWICKLUNG 83
4.6.1 DEFINITION VON ORGANISATION 83
4.6.2 BGF ALS ORGANISATIONSENTWICKLUNG 85
4.6.2.1 Organisationsentwicklung 85
4.6.3 ORGANISATIONALES LERNEN ALS VERBESSERUNGSPROZESS 86
4.6.4 FORMEN DES ORGANISATIONALEN LERNENS: 88
4.6.5 WIDERSTÄNDE DER BESCHÄFTIGTEN 90
4.6.6 DIE ROLLE DES BERATERS 90
4.6.7 BGF VS. OE 91
4.6.8 BASISINSTRUMENTE DER OE 93
4.6.8.1 Partizipation 96
4.6.8.2 Empowerment 98
4.6.9 GEMEINSAMKEITEN: VON OE UND BGF 98
4.6.10 UNTERSCHIEDE VON OE UND BGF 99
4.7 DIE VISION EINER GESUNDEN ORGANISATION 100
4.7.1 ARBEITSBEDINGUNGEN UND GESUNDHEIT 101
4.7.1.1 Demand / Control-Modell 101
4.7.1.2 Anforderungs- / Belastungskonzept 102
4.7.2 ARBEITSVERHALTEN 103
4.7.3 ARBEITSBEDINGUNGEN 103
4.7.4 ARBEITSSITUATION 103
4.7.5 ORGANISATIONSPATHOLOGIEN 105
4.7.6 GESUNDE FÜHRUNG 106
4.7.7 UNTERNEHMENSKULTUR 106
4.7.7.1 Definition 106
5 BETRIEBLICHES GESUNDHEITSMANAGEMENT 108
5.1 PROJEKTMANAGEMENT 108
5.1.1 LEITFADEN FÜR EIN BGF-PROJEKT 109
5.1.2 AUFTRAGSERKLÄRUNG 110
5.1.3 VERLAUF EINES PROJEKTMANAGEMENTS: 110
5.2 BETRIEBLICHE GESUNDHEITSFÖRDERUNG ALS MANAGEMENTPROZESS 113
5.3 INTERVENTIONSINSTRUMENTE 115
5.4 INSTRUMENTE DER BGF 117
5.4.1 DIAGNOSE 117
5.4.2 INTERVENTIONSPLANUNG 118
5.4.3 INTERVENTIONSDURCHFÜHRUNG 118
5.4.4 EVALUATION 118
5.5 GEEIGNETE INSTRUMENTE DER BGF 120
5.6 DIE VERANKERUNG DES GESUNDHEITSMANAGEMENTS (GM) IM UNTERNEHMEN 123
5.6.1 BGM ALS INTEGRATIONSAUFGABE 125
5.6.2 KOMMUNIKATION 127
5.6.3 NUTZEN UND WIRKSAMKEIT DER BETRIEBLICHEN GESUNDHEITSFÖRDERUNG (BGF) 128
5.6.4 ÖKONOMISCHER NUTZEN 129
5.6.5 WIRKUNG DER BGF 130
5.6.5.1 Nutzen aus der Sicht der Beschäftigten: 130
5.6.5.2 Nutzen aus der Sicht des Unternehmens: 131
5.6.6 GESUNDHEITLICHE EFFEKTE DER BGF-MAßNAHMEN 131
6 FORSCHUNGSGEGENSTAND UND AUSWERTUNG 133
6.1 EINLEITUNG 133
6.2 PROBLEMBESCHREIBUNG 133
6.3 UNTERSUCHUNGSVORGEHEN 134
6.4 ERHEBUNGSMETHODE 134
6.4.1 EXPERTENINTERVIEW 135
6.4.1.1 Leitende Forschungsfragen 135
6.4.1.2 Experten 135
6.4.1.3 Leitfaden 135
6.4.2 TRANSKRIPTION 136
6.4.3 QUALITATIVE INHALTSANALYSE 137
6.4.3.1 Vorstellung des Materials und Forschungsstand 137
6.4.3.2 Festlegung des Materials 138
6.4.3.3 Analyse der Entstehungssituation 138
6.4.3.4 Formale Charakteristika des Materials 138
6.4.3.5 Fragestellung der Analyse 138
6.4.3.6 Ablauf der Analyse 139
6.5 ERGEBNISDARSTELLUNG 141
6.5.1 AUSWERTUNG DER FRAGEN 142
6.5.1.1 Einstiegsfrage: Wie schätzen Sie die Entwicklung der BGF in den letzten Jahren ein? 142
6.5.1.2 Problemzentrierte Fragen 144
6.5.1.3 Ad-hoc-Fragen Allgemein 162
6.5.1.4 Abschlussfrage: Welche Aktionen wären seitens der Gesundheitspolitik notwendig, um die
BGF in Zukunft attraktiver / erfolgreicher zu machen? 166
7 AUSBLICK UND EMPFEHLUNGEN 167
7.1 ALLGEMEINE EMPFEHLUNGEN 169
7.2 EMPFEHLUNGEN AUS DEN EXPERTENINTERVIEWS 170
8 FAZIT 173
9 LITERATUR 174
ANHANG 184
TABELLEN 184

Guter Rat, aber um fast 20 Jahre zu spät

Donnerstag, 16. April 2015 - 08:08

Eine heutiges Rundschreiben von “Personal und Arbeitsrecht aktuell” hat den Betreff “Gefährdungsbeurteilung: Beziehen Sie jetzt auch psychische Belastungen mit ein”. Jetzt?? Die haben immer noch nicht begriffen, dass keine neuen Bestimmungen zur Berücksichtigung psychischer Belastungen in das Arbeitsschutzgesetz hineingeschrieben wurden, sondern dass sogar in der Begründung der Gesetzesänderung nachgelesen werden kann, dass hier bisher schon geltendes Recht nur klarer formuliert wurde.

Die Plicht zur Beurteilung psychischer Belastungen im Arbeitsschutz besteht seit 1996.

Zu Recht wird in der Email die Firma SICK AG gelobt. Die SICK AG ist ihrem Betriebsrat dafür sicherlich dankbar. Der Betriebsrat des Unternehmens griff das Thema der psychischen Belastungen bereits um die Jahrhundertwende herum auf und trieb es dann mit großen Einsatz voran. Andere Betriebsräte konnten davon lernen.

What kind of “consensus” will be reached for ISO 45001?

Donnerstag, 16. April 2015 - 06:51

https://drafts.bsigroup.com/Home/View/3449099

Comment

How will a consensus be reached for ISO 45001? The 1st CD had been rejected because it failed to get two thirds of the required votes. The representatives of the employee side and the business side probably would not allow to let such a surprise happen again. It seems that the promoters of ISO 45001 are quite sure that they get their way and meet the planned deadlines. Are they confident because as many voters could be added as required to get two thirds of the vote? I fear that the employer side has significantly more resources to secure a majority for their position compared to the resources which are available to the employee side.

Remedy

Democracy instead of plutocracy.

Protection of mental health weakened in ISO 45001

Mittwoch, 15. April 2015 - 08:02

https://drafts.bsigroup.com/Home/View/3449108

Comment

“This International Standard specifies requirements for an occupational health and safety (OH&S) management system, with guidance for its use, to enable an organization to provide safe and healthy working conditions for the prevention of injury and ill-health and to proactively improve its OH&S performance.” is not enough. OHSAS 18001:2007 makes clear, that the prevention of fatalities is part of the standard. And in the definition of “ill health”, also mental health is mentioned.

Remedy

This International Standard specifies requirements for an occupational health and safety (OH&S) management system, with guidance for its use, to enable an organization to provide safe and healthy working conditions for the prevention of

  • physical and mental ill-health,
  • injury and
  • fatality

as well as to proactively improve the OH&S performance of the organization.

False Claims

Dienstag, 14. April 2015 - 08:05

http://www.iosh.co.uk/~/media/Documents/Networks/Branch/Ireland/Speaker presentations/Safety in a re emerging construction sector/Finbarr Stapleton presentation.ashx, page 18

A system meeting the requirements of ISO DIS 45001 will meet OHSAS 18001

The presentation fails to prove that this claim is true. Compared to OHSAS 18001 and ILO-OSH, in ISO 45001 the rights of employees are weaker.

 
And http://www.healthandsafetyatwork.com/hsw/safety/iso-45001-second-draft claims:

Second ISO 45001 draft emphasises worker consultation. [...] key change is an increased emphasis on the importance of worker consultation. The lack of reference to communication with workers in the first draft was a major concern for the International Labour Organisation, the United Nation’s agency that promotes labour rights. [...]

This is a cheap trick. Don’t compare CD2 to CD1. Compare CD2 to OHSAS 18001:2007 and to ILO-OSH.

Bussiness minded approach to ISO 45001

Dienstag, 14. April 2015 - 07:48

http://ehstoday.com/safety-leadership/connecting-dots-iso-45001-supply-chain-and-risk

Connecting the Dots: ISO 45001, the Supply Chain and Risk

On March 26, voting began on ISO 45001, which sets requirements for occupational health and safety management systems. Kathy Seabrook, former president of the American Society of Safety Engineers, shared her thoughts on ISO 45001 at a recent event.
[...]
According to Seabrook, there are two drivers impacting change by some organizations to be more accountable for their supply chain: the market economy and sustainability reporting, and they are closely tied, she noted. “The investment community and organizational stakeholders are driving market demand for more transparency from the organizations they invest in,” said Seabrook.
[...]
According to Seabrook, ISO 45001 can inform and play a role in creating solutions that cross borders. While the scope of ISO 45001 is not intended to include supply chain workers, “an organization can choose to leverage the ISO 45001 management systems approach as a solution to identify, control and continually improve opportunities to reduce or eliminate worker safety and health risk to workers in the supply chain,” she noted.
[...]

This is an unsurprisingly American business minded approach: The concerns on the side of employee organizations are no issue to the author of this article. And the author probably has not even has an idea, why this should be an issue.

By the way: If voting already begun, than BSI’s invitation to the public could be just an alibi. Is ISO 45001 already a farce before it is pushed through?

Comments on 5.4 “Participation, consultation and representation” in ISO 45001 2nd CD

Freitag, 10. April 2015 - 07:54

5.4 Participation, consultation and representation

https://drafts.bsigroup.com/Home/View/3449155?pos=3449155

Comment

This is about Employee Participation: ISO 45001 vs. OHSAS 18001

ISO 45001 weakens the worker’s options compared to what has been achieved in OHSAS 18001:2007, paragraph 4.4.3.2 “Participation and consultation”.

Remedy

Here the employee representatives in the committee probably will have to propose significant changes in order to come to a standard which is acceptable in Europe. My proposal is to at least maintain what has been achieved with OHSAS 18001:2007.

I hope that employee representatives thoroughly compare to the 2nd CD of ISO 45001 what is written about employee participation in OHSAS 18001:2007. Additionally, the differences between OHSAS 18001:1999 and OHSAS 18001:2007 show what had been achieved for the workers thanks to the beneficial competition with the ILO standard. (There also was resistance on the employers’ side against this improvement. I know of a case where a large European company had been certified since 2009 for OHSAS 18001:2007 although they only switched to from :1999 to :2007 in 2013 after complaints by employees to the accreditation authority.) Was OHSAS 18001 too tough on employers? Seemingly the development of ISO 45001 is used by them as a means to revert these achievements.

Unions should check with labour councils how much resistance they met when trying to put 4.4.3.2 of OHSAS 18001:2007 into practise. Support to workers councils by certification auditors may have been negligable too. Employers may want to use the chance provided by a new AMS standard (ISO 45001) to get rid of requirements which gave workes a say in occupational health&safety practises.

Furthermore, the “Certification scheme for occupational health and safety (OHS) management systems according to OHSAS 18001″ of the SCCM (Stichting Coördinatie Certificatie Milieu- en arbomanagementsystemen) in the Netherlands is a valuable source for ideas, how workers participation can be put into practice.

 

Comment

There is too much “as applicable” in the draft, e.g. “Effective participation of workers (and, as applicable, their representatives)”. The workers’ representatives need sufficcient competence and clout.

Remedy

The standard should make it an requirement to establish elected workers representations for OH&S matters where no works councils exist yet. Without such representatives you simply can forget about an effective workers participation. One special requirement should be to let the workers’ representatives participate in certification audits and internal audits. These workes should be able to obtain the required qualifications.

Comment on 3.33 “incident” in ISO 45001 2nd CD

Dienstag, 7. April 2015 - 20:41

From the viewpoint of employees, the term “incident” has a much better definition in OHSAS 18001:2007 than in ISO 45001. Here the employers seemingly were successful in watering down the standard. I posted this comment in drafts.bsigroup.com:

https://drafts.bsigroup.com/Home/View/3449143?pos=3449143

“Incident” and “ill health” according to OHSAS 18001:

  • Incident: Work-related event(s) in which
    • an injury
    • or ill health (regardless of severity)
    • or fatality

    occurred, or could have occurred.

  • Ill health: Identifiable, adverse physical or mental condition arising from and/or made worse by a work activity and/or work-related situation.

“Occurrence(s) arising out of or in the course of work that could or does result in injury or ill-health” as proposed here for ISO 45001 is much less ambitious. Strangely, “fatality” has been dropped completely in the ISO 45001 draft. And “(regardless of severity)” made sure that employers cannot “evaluate” the severity of ill health before it enters the evaluation process defined in the standard.

Use terms from OHSAS 18001:2007. Make sure that incidents are not filtered away before the enter the official process of evaluation of ill health and its severity.

Again no definition of “ill health” in ISO 45001 2nd CD

Dienstag, 7. April 2015 - 20:22

My comments to “Terms and definitions” (section 3 in in ISO 45001) posted in drafts.bsigroup.com:

https://drafts.bsigroup.com/Home/View/3449110 (not online anymore)

Comment

In the comments to the 1st CD it already has been criticized, that one of the most important terms in ISO 45001 has not been defined. Strangely, a definition of the term “ill health” is missing again in the 2nd CD. Thus, OHSAS 18001 still does a much better job: “Ill health: Identifiable, adverse physical or mental condition arising from and/or made worse by a work activity and/or work-related situation.”

In contrary to ISO 45001, the BS OHSAS 18001:2007 explicitely mentions physical and mental health. This is important: Search for “Health Impact of The Psychosocial Hazards of Work: An Overview” in the pages of the WHO.

A standard which does not acknowledge the importance to protect mental health is unacceptable in the 21st century. Sadly, ISO 45001 seems to be on the way back to the last century.

Remedy

In order not to fall behind OHSAS 18001:2007, include the definition “Ill health: Identifiable, adverse physical or mental condition arising from and/or made worse by a work activity and/or work-related situation” into 3 “Terms and definitions” of ISO 45001.

2nd ISO 45001 Draft

Dienstag, 7. April 2015 - 07:36

Press Release from BSI
http://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/about-bsi/media-centre/press-releases/2015/march/Comment-on-the-latest-draft-of-occupational-health-and-safety-standard-ISO-45001/:

Comment on the latest draft
of occupational health and safety standard ISO 45001

31 March 2015

A new international standard on occupational health and safety management is currently under development with publication expected in October 2016. The second committee draft of ISO 45001 – Occupational health and safety management standard systems – requirements with guidance for use is now open, with UK comments requested by 1 May 2015. This follows the re-drafting of the standard to reflect comments received from the September 2014 public consultation.

BSI, the UK’s National Standards Body, has worked with experts from around the world to develop the second draft and now invites interested parties to register their comments online: https://drafts.bsigroup.com/Home/Details/54548. All comments submitted will then be considered by a panel of UK experts before BSI submits the national position to the international committee.

Occupational health and safety continues to be a priority across the world. Despite extensive regulation, existing standards and guidelines, work-related disease still kills millions globally each year, with hundreds of thousands more fatalities caused by workplace accidents. The international committee developing ISO 45001 includes experts from over 55 countries, 14 observer countries and around 20 liaison bodies, all with knowledge and practical experience of occupational health and safety issues and the challenges faced. The new standard is designed to replace the widely-used OHSAS 18001 whilst also taking into account other key documents and discussion points from around the world. Ultimately it intends to provide a single, clear framework  for organizations of all types and sizes who wish to improve their OH&S performance and protect those working on their behalf or who may be affected by the organization’s activities.

ISO 45001 is being developed using a collaborative, consensus-based approach taking into account the views of large and small organizations, government bodies, trades unions and worker representative organizations. To ensure the widest possible input is received from stakeholders BSI has taken the unusual step of making drafts available to the public at every stage of development. Usually, this would only happen once, half way through the process.

ISO 45001 has been written to a core structure and common text defined by ISO for use by all management system standards. The core structure will ensure that the new standard is broadly aligned to the forthcoming revisions of ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 – thus helping those who are implementing multiple management systems.

Anne Hayes, Head of Market Development for Governance & Risk at BSI, said: “Occupational health and safety is a matter of importance for all businesses worldwide, regardless of their size or sector. It is not an issue that can be ignored especially when it can literally mean life and death for many.”

To read and comment on ISO CD2 45001 please visit BSI’s draft review site:

https://drafts.bsigroup.com/Home/Details/54548

The draft is also available from the BSI shop:

http://shop.bsigroup.com/ProductDetail/?pid=000000000030323155