The Construction Products Directive (CPD) adopted in 1989 may be replaced before the end of the year by a new EU regulation. From an OSH perspective, it is essential that this regulation also contain provisions governing the safety of construction products. An urgent need for action exists in this respect, as has been identified by a KAN study into the safety of construction products which is to appear shortly.

As a matter of principle, the health and safety of workers at work should not be governed by standards. This principle is setout in the German Consensus Statement on Standardization in the Field of the Health and Safety of Workers at Work, which in turn is based upon essential provisions of European social policy (Article 137 of the EC Treaty). Since the German Consensus Statement has repeatedly been the subject of different interpretations, however, KAN has drawn up an explanatory document which is intended to describe the current limits of and scope for standardization in this area.

Anthropometric data are required in numerous areas, including that of the safe and healthy design of products. These data must therefore also be included in standards. The recent KAN Report 44 on the subject of “Anthropometric data in standards” provides information on how complete and up-to-date information can be added to the body of standards in the interests of occupational safety and health.

The website of DIN (www.din.de/en) offers anyone with an interest in standardization a wide range of information coupled with a comprehensive search function. The procedures for standards development and the scope for participation in the mare described, as are legal aspects and issues relating to standards policy. A selection of pages which are particularly useful for standardization work are described below.

Since April 2009, a range of DIN products have been grouped under the heading DIN SPEC. These products are created by means of procedures which do not necessarily require the full consensus of all parties with a vested interest; as a result, their development time is shorter than that of standards. In the view of the OSH lobby, these documents are however not suitable when they impact upon health and safety aspects.