Monday, October 4, 2010
What Is Stem Hair Growth
SAVE ON OCCUPATIONAL
Government, no doubt considering the opportunity and the favorable balance of power, has introduced roughly in his legislation on pensions, the legislation necessary for the promulgation by order of the whole "reform of occupational medicine" desired and designed by the MEDEF.
Article 25 of the text adopted by the majority members, prepares and allows the passage of all provisions of the " Memorandum of Understanding on the Modernization of Occupational Medicine "that the MEDEF has tried, unsuccessfully, to impose trade unions, a year ago.
It amends the law by transferring the powers of doctors to employers.
It provides for regulations that will implement and ensure the empowerment employer on health at work.
It attempts to legalize some discriminatory provisions are difficult to obtain, by decree.
tomorrow Promulgate section 25 is vote the entire "
Memorandum of Understanding on the Modernization of Occupational Medicine," developed by the MEDF refused by all trade unions. This protocol provides for the appropriation of resources by employers to control the occupational health of employees. This ownership will not be without consequences for the detection of occupational hazards, recognition of occupational diseases and accidents. It will help control absenteeism, medical screening to hiring, dismissal of the sick and disabled.
This objective implies that the MEDEF, the satisfaction of a precondition, "demedicalize" medical prevention of occupational hazards. Tasks legally assigned to occupational physicians (define and implement the content, methods and tools such prevention) must be transferred to employers. Darcos has summarized this principle by writing: "the health of employees is the case managers' realize is that if Article 25 was finally passed. Indeed, it would allow the repeal of sections:
L4622-2
" health services at work are provided by one or more physicians who call themselves" doctors Labour .
health services at work call, [...] skills [CRAM, OPPBTP, ARACT or persons or bodies whose powers are recognized by CRAM OPPBTP and ARACT.] . The call to skill is performed under conditions guaranteeing the independence rules of the medical profession and independence of persons or organizations involved. "
The current missions of Physicians: "drive health actions at work [...] advisor
[...] employers, workers and their representatives [...] monitor the health of workers [...] participate in monitoring occupational exposures " be entrusted to the directions of Occupational Health services, therefore employers (Art. L. 4622-1-1). This transfer of responsibility is confirmed by several new articles: "The e director of occupational health inter organizes, under the authority of the President, the actions specified by the Board of Directors (Art. L. 4624-2). Thus, e doctor has only executive functions ( Art. L. 4622-1-2): "In health services at work the tasks defined in Article L. 4622-1-1 are performed by occupational physicians, in conjunction with employers and employees designated ... or stakeholders in prevention of occupational risks and
( Art. L. 4622-7-1) " The tasks of occupational health services are provided by a multidisciplinary team of health consisting of at least occupational physicians, practitioners in occupational risk prevention, nurses ... ". This takeover by employers on the structures Medicine and Health at Work is undivided, as in business services (so-called autonomous), would be the facility director who would be responsible for this prevention. Inter Services for enterprises Occupational Health (STIS), Article 25 provides (Article L. 4622-7-3) that: "The health service inter-working is administered by a board composed of equal numbers: representatives [...] nominated by employers' organizations, [...] among whom is elected chairman of the board who has a casting vote in case of a tie.
[...] and representatives of trade unions of employees. With the disappearance of the implicit control committee where representatives of employees are now the majority, would disappear status "protected employee" of occupational physicians, a status that is intended to guarantee their independence. Not only are employee representatives will have no decision making power, but they will lose their current powers: their prior consent to any decision concerning the hiring, firing, change industry or company occupational physicians. It is now the Director that "guarantees the independence of the occupational physician (Art L.4624-2).." But hold up on health at work, of course, other reasons that employers get rid of a doctor who specializes embarrassing, because legally and exclusively responsible "to prevent tampering of health workers because of their work. " This is to control the Medef health. This target is prepared in the law which provides for its application decrees. (Article L. 4622-7-2): "
missions of health services to work are determined, in accordance with local realities, as part of a contract goals and means "and (Article L. 4624-2)
'Decrees Council of State shall provide details of action for those working in health services at work and the conditions of application of article L. 4624-1 " The " Memorandum of Understanding on the Modernization of Occupational Medicine" shows that the MEDEF has a design team of multidisciplinary health very special. The employer would have the opportunity to fish, according to his needs and his pleasure the personal and the competencies they wish to use in a pool made available by STIS. It suggests, in fact, legalize loan systematic workforce to employers by STIS, upon request. To circumvent the illegality of Article 25 specifies (Article L. 4644-1) "The employer
(member of a STIS) designate one or more competent employees for s occupy the activities of protection and prevention of occupational risks for the company. Otherwise, [...] employer may use one of the following stakeholders: Stakeholders in the prevention of occupational risks of health service job inter ... which it adheres. " To avoid certain regulations under the " Memorandum of Understanding on the Modernization of Occupational Medicine" employers, are denied on the grounds that they introduce unequal treatment of employees, Article 25 seeks to give them a legal value. It provides that certain employees will not have to apply the same " arrangements for monitoring the health status ( Art. L. 4625-1) other :
employees " temporary [...] vocational training [...] intermediate associations; running in a [...] business other than their employer, [...] [...] distant in a different department [...] temporarily posted [...] seasonal. " Similarly, the "medical monitoring" of "models of the individual employer and employees" would be done by " physicians not specialized in occupational medicine ( art. L. 4622-9). The pretext that attempted to justify the intrusion of Article 25 in the text on pensions has fizzled. The editor rejected a correction Ultimately, the occupational physician in Art. L. 4121-3-1 organizing the assessment of "hardship as Woerth" and indicating that "
For each worker exposed to one or more risk factors professionals [...] employer in connection with the occupational physician set a record
[...] conditions of hardship which the worker is exposed and the period during which this exhibition occurred " Article 25 of the Pensions Act, cynical legislative avatar, born of contempt for government employees, professionals, managers and elected officials themselves, must be removed. Occupational medicine is the result of a unanimous vote of the national representation. It can not reform itself in connection with an ambush of government, whatever may be the power of his majority. Unless clearly want to destroy it with the consequences that would result in his death, he must abandon the voting section 25.
On September 27, 2010
-------------------------- -------
contact@slmt.fr http://www.slmt.fr
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment