This free survey is powered by QUESTIONPRO.COM
  1. Surveys
  2. 2011
  3. April
  4. E
  5. EvaluationCampaigns
0%
Exit Survey »
 
 
APPENDIX 1

Introduction Questionnaire

At SLIC plenary in Bilbao on the 7th of May 2010, a working group was established to evaluate SLIC’s recent joint initiatives.
The objectives of the 'project team' are:
• to review the process followed to deliver 3 recent SLIC campaigns (Asbestos in 2006, Manual Handling of loads in 2007-2008 and Dangerous Substances in 2010 );
• to examine the outputs and outcomes from these campaigns;
• to propose how SLIC can make optimal use of data arising from such campaigns (e.g. within labour inspection services, duty holders, other bodies);
• to propose how SLIC can react/ respond to the findings from campaigns;
• to make suggestions for improvement to the selection, development and delivery of joint initiatives by the Committee (new campaigns).
The working group elaborated a number of ideas to fulfill this task. To get an impression of the opinion of SLIC members and EFTA countries a questionnaire has been developed. You are kindly requested to fill in the questionnaire using the internet link, before the 1st of September 2011.
 
 
 
c1. For which country do you fill in the data?
 
Austria
 
Belgium
 
Bulgaria
 
Cyprus
 
Czech Republic
 
Denmark
 
Estonia
 
Finland
 
France
 
Germany
 
Greece
 
Hungary
 
Ireland
 
Italy
 
Iceland
 
Latvia
 
Liechtenstein
 
Lithuania
 
Luxembourg
 
Malta
 
Netherlands
 
Norway
 
Poland
 
Portugal
 
Romania
 
Slovakia
 
Slovenia
 
Spain
 
Sweden
 
Switzerland
 
United Kingdom
 
 
 
c2. What is the name of your department, directorate or inspectorate?
   
 
 
 
c3. What is your email address to contact?
   
 
 
 
m.0 Introduction MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS

In 2007 and 2008 the communication and inspection campaign “MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS” took place.
In 2007 the focus was on transport and healthcare, and in 2008 on construction and retail.

Associated reports and documents include:
• Evaluation report: SLIC European inspection and communication campaign. Manual handling of loads 2007
• Committee of Senior Labour Inspectors, Doc.0183_2008, May 2009http://www.handlingloads.eu/en/site/1/11
• Senior Labour Inspectors Committee. European communication and inspection campaign. Manual handling of loads 2008/2009, Committee of Senior Labour Inspectors, September 2009
• E-learning module on the Manual Handling of Loadshttp://osha.europa.eu/en/topics/msds/slic/index_html/mmc
• Other documents can be found on CIRCA.
 
 
 
m.1 Did your country participate in the communication campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS?
 
yes
 
no (go to m.2b, goes automatically with web-application)
 
 
 
m.2a Did your country participate in the inspection campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS?
 
yes (go to m.3, goes automatically with web-application)
 
no (go to m.3, goes automatically with web-application)
 
 
 
m.2b Did your country participate in the inspection campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS?
 
yes
 
no (go to a.0, goes automatically with web-application)
 
 
 
m.3 Did the EU-campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS match or influence the national priorities?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
m.4 Did your country have used?


 
common indicators determined by the SLIC for measuring the output of the EU-campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS
 
national indicators for measuring the output of the EU-campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS?
 
both
 
none
 
 
 
m.5 Did your country evaluate the impact of the EU-campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
m.6 Did the EU-campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS induce health and safety measures in enterprises?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
m.7 Did the EU-campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS contribute to the OSH management and prevention culture in enterprises?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
m.8 Did the EU-campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS contribute to inform employers and workers?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
m.9 Did the EU-campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS induce an increase in adequate risk assessments?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
m.10 Did the EU-campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS improve the national infrastructure, external protective and preventive services, consultants, suppliers of services and products, or social dialogue?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
m.11 Did the EU-campaign MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS stimulate the enforcement in SME’s and high risk sectors?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
m.12 Did the exchange of information related to MANUAL HANDLING OF LOADS with authorities from other Member States (bench marking) stimulate national developments?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
m.13 Did your country use the SLIC material of the campaign MANUEL HANDLING OF LOADS for external communication?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
m.14 Did your country, related to the campaign MANUEL HANDLING OF LOADS, develop additional material for external communication?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
m.15 Did your country use the SLIC material of the campaign MANUEL HANDLING OF LOADS for internal training?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
m.16 Did your country, related to the campaign MANUEL HANDLING OF LOADS, develop additional material for internal training?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
m.17 Did your country have a national follow-up to the campaign MANUEL HANDLING OF LOADS?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------



a.0 Introduction ASBESTOS

In 2006 the communication and inspection campaign ”ASBESTOS: Asbestos is Deadly Serious! Prevent Exposure!” took place.

Associated reports and documents include:
• Asbestos is Deadly Serious! Prevent Exposure! Doc.1342_2009, Committee of Senior Labour Inspectors, Prague 29 May 2009http://osha.europa.eu/en/campaigns/asbestos/camp_report.pdf
• Senior Labour Inspectors Committee (2006) A practical guide on best practice to prevent or minimise asbestos risks in work that involves (or may involve) asbestos: for the employer, the workers and the labour inspector.
• Other documents can be found on CIRCA.
 
 
 
a.1 Did your country participate in the communication campaign ASBESTOS?
 
yes
 
no (go to a.2b, goes automatically with web-application)
 
 
 
a.2a Did your country participate in the inspection campaign ASBESTOS?
 
yes (go to a.3, goes automatically with web-application)
 
no (go to a.3, goes automatically with web-application)
 
 
 
a.2b Did your country participate in the inspection campaign ASBESTOS?
 
yes
 
no (go to s.0, goes automatically with web-application)
 
 
 
a.3 Did the EU-campaign ASBESTOS match or influence the national priorities?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
a.4 Did your country have used?
 
common indicators determined by the SLIC for measuring the output of the EU-campaign ASBESTOS
 
national indicators for measuring the output of the EU-campaign ASBESTOS?
 
both
 
none
 
 
 
a.5 Did your country evaluate the impact of the EU-campaign ASBESTOS?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
a.6 Did the EU-campaign ASBESTOS induce health and safety measures in enterprises?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
a.7 Did the EU-campaign ASBESTOS contribute to the OSH management and prevention culture in enterprises?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
a.8 Did the EU-campaign ASBESTOS contribute to inform employers and workers?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
a.9 Did the EU-campaign ASBESTOS induce an increase in adequate risk assessments?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
a.10 Did the EU-campaign ASBESTOS improve the national infrastructure, external protective and preventive services, consultants, suppliers of services and products, or social dialogue?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
a.11 Did the EU-campaign ASBESTOS stimulate the enforcement in SME’s and high risk sectors?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
a.12 Did the exchange of information related to ASBESTOS with authorities from other Member States (bench marking) stimulate national developments?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
a.13 Did your country use the SLIC material of the campaign ASBESTOS for external communication?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
a.14 Did your country, related to the campaign ASBESTOS, develop additional material for external communication?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
a.15 Did your country use the SLIC material of the campaign ASBESTOS for internal training?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
a.16 Did your country, related to the campaign ASBESTOS, develop additional material for internal training?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
a.17 Did your country have a national follow-up to the campaign ASBESTOS?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------


s.0 Introduction DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES

In 2010 a communication and inspection campaign on “DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES” took place.
Participating countries could select one or more of following sectors: bakeries, woodworking, cleaning and motor vehicle repair.

Associated reports and documents include:
• Repair, http://www.chemicalscampaign.eu/
• Other documents can be found on CIRCA.
 
 
 
s.1 Did your country participate in the communication campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES?
 
yes
 
no (go to s.2b, goes automatically with web-application)
 
 
 
s.2a Did your country participate in the inspection campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES?
 
yes (go to s.3, goes automatically with web-application)
 
no (go to s.3, goes automatically with web-application)
 
 
 
s.2b Did your country participate in the inspection campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES?
 
yes
 
no (go to f.0, goes automatic with web-application)
 
 
 
s.3 Did the EU-campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES match or influence the national priorities?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
s.4 Did your country have used?
 
common indicators determined by the SLIC for measuring the output of the EU-campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES
 
national indicators for measuring the output of the EU-campaign MANUAL DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES?
 
both
 
none
 
 
 
s.5 Did your country evaluate the impact of the EU-campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
s.6 Did the EU-campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES induce health and safety measures in enterprises?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
s.7 Did the EU-campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES contribute to the OSH management and prevention culture in enterprises?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
s.8 Did the EU-campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES contribute to inform employers and workers?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
s.9 Did the EU-campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES induce an increase in adequate risk assessments?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
s.10 Did the EU-campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES improve the national infrastructure, external protective and preventive services, consultants, suppliers of services and products, or social dialogue?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
s.11 Did the EU-campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES stimulate the enforcement in SME’s and high risk sectors?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
s.12 Did the exchange of information related to DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES with authorities from other Member States (bench marking) stimulate national developments?
 
Very Much
 
Somewhat
 
Undecided
 
Not Really
 
Not at all
 
 
 
s.13 Did your country use the SLIC material of the campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES for external communication?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
s.14 Did your country, related to the campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES, develop additional material for external communication?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
s.15 Did your country use the SLIC material of the campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES for internal training?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
s.16 Did your country, related to the campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES, develop additional material for internal training?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
s.17 Did your country have a national follow-up to the campaign DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES?
 
yes
 
no
 
 
 
f.0 NEW CAMPAIGNS

The last part of the questionnaire is about new campaigns after 2012.


In 2010/11, the SLIC WG looked at the previous Campaigns and evidence from other data sources across EU to identify those activities and locations presenting high risks to workers and others. The votes you cast will help influence the selection of themes for future SLIC campaigns.
 
 
 
f.1 Please rank (1-5) the following risks in order of the priority of your country (1 represents the highest, priority 5 the lowest priority)
Physical risk: Noise
Physical risk: Skin diseases
Psychosocial risk: Aggression & violence
Safety risk: Falls on the same level, slips and trips
Transport safety on work places: land and work vehicles
 
 
 
f.2 Please rank (1-4) the following workplaces in order of priority for your country (1 represents the highest priority, 4 the lowest priority)
Interaction with public
Office work
Work with machines
Land and work vehicles
 
 
 
f.3 Please rank (1-5) the following sectors/branches in order of priority for your country (1 represents the highest, priority 5 the lowest priority)
Agriculture, forestry, hunting
Construction
Manufacturing
Nursing and healthcare
Retail, wholesale
 
 
 
f.4 Please rank (1-7) the following aspects of OSH policy in enterprises in order of priority for your country (1 represents the highest, priority 7 the lowest priority)
Awareness employees, information, training and instruction about risks
Supervision on workers behaviour and workplace
General OSH policy on management level (i.e. plan, do, check, act cycle)
Risk assessment and evaluation of the risks (e.g. promotion of OiRA)
Risk assessment and evaluation for temporary employees and subcontractors
Plans for health & safety improvement
Protective and preventive services
 
 
 
f.5 Does your country have other suggestions in general for future 'SLIC campaigns'? If so, please provide supporting evidence (e.g. country incident data, or other data/evidence).
   
 
 
 
f.6 Does your country prefer every year a SLIC campaign or once in the two year?
 
Every year
 
Every two years
 
 
 
f.7 Does your country have suggestions for improvements of the concept 'Manual for SLIC campaigns' (Appendix 2)?
   
 
If you have questions about the survey please send an email to [email protected] or to [email protected].
Survey Software Powered by QuestionPro Survey Software