KANBrief 1/10
CEN has produced a draft guide which is intended to provide assistance in the creation of standards governing services. It is considered indicative of the direction to be taken by future service standards, and is intended for any party – not only those with experience in standardization – with an interest in standardizing their services. Some of the points stated in the guide are however not consistent with the German OSH position.
The EU Services Directive, 2006/123/EC, encourages the preparation of European standards by which the comparability and quality of services and the provision of information to their recipients can be improved. This intent, and the promotion of the sector by the standards organizations themselves and by European and national policy, has led to a growth in the number of service standards. These cover all services, from ecommerce, through cosmetics, funerary services and engineering, to safety systems. Inevitably, the standards also impact upon the persons providing the services concerned. Service standards may consequently contain requirements concerning the protection of these persons. Such requirements however fall exclusively within the individual Member States’ remit of implementing the OSH directives, and conflict with the principles of the German Consensus Statement (See also KANBrief 3/2006).
KAN’s position is that service standards, and therefore also the “Guide to preparing service standards”, are certainly of potential benefit for the quality of services, for example where consumer safety is concerned. Standards however are not an appropriate instrument for the formulation of requirements concerning the safety and health of the persons delivering the service (such as requirements for the wearing of personal protective equipment or the equipping of the workplaces for protection against certain hazards). Instead, the service provider must comply with the relevant national OSH provisions.
Certain aspects of the CEN guide currently under discussion are in conflict with the German OSH position. At several points, it refers explicitly to aspects concerning the health and safety of workers at work. For example, checklists are provided which explicitly require information concerning this area. Occupational safety and health is also referred to in the components of services. As a result, the guide recommends that service standards include requirements which are contrary to Article 153 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (formerly Article 137 of the EC Treaty).
Besides the issues of the health and safety of workers at work, the guide also describes interfaces to management systems, including OSH management systems. The primary function of these systems is that of assuring the safety and health of the employees. As a matter of principle, their application is voluntary. The standardization of OSH management systems at European and international level would inevitably lead to their being certified. For this reason, it has been rejected by the German OSH lobby, and also by DIN.
Closer examination of the draft of the guide shows that it must be reformulated in certain points in order to make clear that OSH management systems and the health and safety of workers at work must remain outside the scope of standards. The guide is influential for determining the course taken by service standards. Future standards are to be drawn up against this guide. KAN has presented its position on the guide, which is being developed in CEN/BT/WG 163, in a comment.
Other stakeholders share KAN’s view that service standards are in principle useful, whilst likewise pointing out that developers of service standards must be conscious of their limits. Where aspects are already regulated or standards would limit entrepreneurial freedom (for example in the area of management), they are not the proper instrument.
KAN will continue to monitor the standardization of services and make efforts at various levels to ensure that the guide is adjusted.
Bettina Palka