BWI - Briefing calling the ILO to push for a worldwide ban on asbestos [2 June 2005]

1. BWI statement, which calls on ILO to act. more

2. Justification In construction more workers die from mesothelioma than from falls. In developing countries there is no such thing as controlled use. Informal work and weak institutional and technical capacity make asbestos a death sentence. It is essential that the ILO adopts a clear, health based position in favour of a ban, because the asbestos industry is manipulating this ambiguous stance in order to justify their continued (so called) controlled use. The Chrysotile Institute spends millions on advertising in developing countries citing the ILO as endorsing the (controlled) use of asbestos. more

3. Links more

1. BWI Statement

Joint Declaration from the International Building Trade Union Federations, made at the Global Asbestos Congress, Tokyo, 19-21 November 2004.

The Building and Wood Workers International (BWI), the World Federation of Building Workers (WFBW) and the Trades Union International of Workers in the Building, Wood and Building Materials Industries (UITBB) are committed to actively promote the global ban of all forms of asbestos from the construction industry and from all other industrial sectors, and to promote the effective regulation of work with in -situ asbestos in demolition, conversion, renovation and maintenance works by law.

Considering that:

• All forms of asbestos, including chrysotile, are classified as known human carcinogens by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and by the International Programme for Chemical Safety.

• 90 per cent of chrysotile asbestos is used in asbestos cement materials.

• 100,000 workers die every year from diseases caused by exposure to asbestos.

• It has taken three decades of protracted efforts and the emergence of suitable alternatives for a comprehensive ban on the manufacture and use of asbestos and asbestos-containing products to be adopted in a number of countries. Furthermore that these countries now permit the handling of in situ asbestos only during asbestos removal, demolition, renovation and maintenance work carried out under strictly controlled working conditions.

The BWI, the UITBB and the WFBW call upon the governments and social partners of all countries to:

• Take immediate steps to ban all mining, manufacture, recycling and use of all forms of asbestos and asbestos-containing materials as soon as possible.

• Undertake and support all measures intended to eliminate asbestos and asbestos - containing products from the economic cycle and to replace asbestos with less harmful products.

• Make the protection of workers against asbestos exposure a priority.

• Ratify and implement the provisions of ILO Convention 162 (1986), Safety in the Use of Asbestos, and to implement the provisions of its accompanying Recommendation 172 as a minimum standard not to be fallen below.

• Ensure proper compensation to the victims of asbestos related diseases.

The BWI, the UITBB and the WFBW further call upon the International Labour Organisation to:

• Adopt a clear health-based position in favour of the elimination of the use of all forms of asbestos and asbestos containing materials.

• Continue to encourage Member States to ratify and implement the provisions of Convention 162 (1986), Safety in the Use of Asbestos, and to implement the provisions of its accompanying Recommendation 172, as a minimum standard not to be fallen below.

• Make an explicit statement clarifying to all member States that Convention 162 does not provide a justification for, or endorsement of, the continued use of asbestos.

• Resolve to promote the elimination of the use of all forms of asbestos and asbestos-containing materials in all Member States.

• Assist Member States by drawing up national action programmes for the management, control and elimination of asbestos from the working and social environment.

2 . Justification for a worldwide ban on asbestos

(i) The intention of the ILO Asbestos Convention (C162) in 1986 when it was adopted was to eliminate the risk caused by asbestos by gradually banning and replacing asbestos. The Convention readily bans certain types of asbestos and processes in its use. It provides clear restrictions on any use, demolition and disposal of asbestos containing products.

In particular, article 10 gives two alternatives:

(a) replacement of asbestos or of certain types of asbestos or products containing asbestos by other materials or products or the use of alternative technology, scientifically evaluated by the competent authority as harmless or less harmful, whenever this is possible;

(b) total or partial prohibition of the use of asbestos or of certain types of asbestos or products containing asbestos in certain work processes.

The text refers to "asbestos" meaning all types of it.

This was recently confirmed unanimously by the tripartite ILO/WHO Joint Committee recommending "the elimination of asbestos related diseases".

(ii) The ILO Convention C162 should not be read alone as it was written in the context of existing ILO Conventions. According to the preamble of the Convention:

"Noting the relevant international labour Conventions and Recommendations, and in particular the Occupational Cancer Convention and Recommendation, 1974, the Working Environment (Air Pollution, Noise and Vibration) Convention and Recommendation, 1977, the Occupational Safety and Health Convention and Recommendation, 1981, the Occupational Health Services Convention and Recommendation, 1985, the list of occupational diseases as revised in 1980 appended to the Employment Injury Benefits Convention, 1964, as well as the Code of practice on safety in the use of asbestos, published by the International Labour Office in 1984, which establish the principles of national policy and action at the national level."

[Click here to view the ILO Conventions in full]

These Conventions provide for a number of measures, for example, Article 1 of C139, the carcinogens convention:

"Each Member which ratifies this Convention shall make every effort to have carcinogenic substances and agents to which workers may be exposed in the course of their work replaced by non-carcinogenic substances or agents or by less harmful substances or agents; in the choice of substitute substances or agents account shall be taken of their carcinogenic, toxic and other properties."

The ILO's chemicals Convention C170 says: "Article 19 When in an exporting member State all or some uses of hazardous chemicals are prohibited for reasons of safety and health at work, this fact and the reasons for it shall be communicated by the exporting member State to any importing country."

This is essentially the same idea that that of the UN Rotterdam Convention: providing information on hazards to an importing country. ILO strongly promotes implementation of this principle – and ratification of C170 and others listed above. Following this principle it would be logical to include chrysotile on the Prior Informed Consent list.

C162 does not repeat requirements of these other Conventions but in order to provide adequate protection against asbestos, these Conventions should be either ratified or essential contents of these should be applied.

This is fine for ILO legal experts, but difficult for ordinary people to understand.

We need clear positions. Since 1986, many things have changed:

• IARC - the WHO Agency classifying carcinogenic substances has classified Chrysotile asbestos as "Carcinogenic to humans". (Other often used replacement fibres, such as mineral wools have not been classified in this group.)

• Chrysotile has also been classified as carcinogenic by the IPCS, the ILO/WHO/UNEP International Programme on Chemical Safety in its Environmental Health Criteria document No. 203: "Commercial grades of chrysotile have been associated with an increased risk of pneumoconioses, lung cancer, and mesothelioma in numerous epidemiological studies of exposed workers". more

• The IPCS (ILO/WHO/UNEP) International Chemical Safety Cards have listed chrysotile as a carcinogen: " Effects of long-term or repeated exposure: The substance may have effects on the lungs, resulting in pulmonary fibrosis and mesothelioma. This substance is carcinogenic to humans." more

• The ISSA Construction Section (of which the BWI is a member) has called for a ban on the use of all asbestos containing materials.

• The Senior Labour Inspectors Committee (SLIC) has also called for a ban on the use of asbestos containing products

• In the ILO Conference on Occupational Respiratory Diseases, Kyoto, Japan, 1997 (Excerpta Medica International Congress Series 1153, 1236 pages) it was clearly and unanimously expressed in a specific session attended by world specialists that, in particular, in countries where the capacity to prevent asbestos exposure through other means is weak or non-existent, banning becomes the only reasonable alternative.

• Many other alternative substances have become available, such as cellulose products or PVA products. Replacement fibres, such as glass wool are not classified equally as carcinogenic to humans and are clearly less hazardous. However, prevention measures must be be carefully applied. more

Measures to reduce the problems related to these other fibres have been agreed - unanimously by a tripartite Meeting of Experts - to be different from those for asbestos, including chrysotile. more • pdf

Reading the relevant ILO Conventions together - and taking into account the latest information and classification on carcinogenic properties of chrysotile - it becomes clear that banning asbestos – including chrysotile - is an efficient and fully acceptable measure to eliminate asbestos related diseases, including pleural plaques, asbestosis, mesothelioma and lung cancer.

Since the Convention No. 162 was adopted by the ILO Conference in 1986, it has been ratified only by 27 member States of the ILO. Canada has ratified it. Canada has not ratified related Conventions 121, 139, 148, 155, 161 nor later Conventions C170 on Chemicals, and C176 on Mining.

Today 32 countries have banned all types of asbestos and restrictions exist in several countries. Plans to prohibit the use of asbestos are underway in many other countries. Undoubtedly, a call for a ban from the ILO would have a tremendous impact. Arguably, therefore, the most important contribution to prevention of occupational disease that the Conference Committee can make will be to push for a world wide ban on the use of this deadly mineral.

3. Links

Hazards asbestos webpages

International Ban Asbestos Secretariat webpages