A report on occupational medicine recommends replacing the recruitment medical examination by an obligatory visit for information and prevention. An employee who refuses the position of development proposals would face a “real and serious grounds for dismissal.”
The report of the group work ‘Fitness and Occupational Medicine “, prepared by MP Michel Issindou emits 27 different recommendations for organizing occupational medicine, reveals Le Parisien. Published yesterday by the government, it will be presented May 28 at the Policy Board on the working conditions (CTOC). Le Figaro reported on the proposed measures.
The suitability test is at the heart of the report. To test the ability of employees at the workplace, the Labour Code now provides for mandatory medical examination for all, prior to employment or the end of the trial period. The mission now proposes to substitute the visit by hiring a mandatory visit for information and prevention “all employees under contract for 3 months or more, conducted by the occupational health nurse.”
The visit of information and prevention “must take place within 3 months for employees in positions at risk and within 6 months for the others,” it added. The various visits made, “if they no longer give rise to a notice of ability, will be an individual statement health monitoring.” The suitability test is valid it for the security posts, “before hiring.” The mission defines these security posts as “one that involves an activity likely to seriously and immediately endanger the health of other workers or third parties.” Monitoring will be conducted by a different physician occupational physician following the employee.
“It’s the end of the protection of employees who have a medical condition”
The employees could also make it less often visits their occupational physician. So far, the medical examination took place every two years. The mission now recommends “a periodic medical examination at least every five years for employees.” This measure does not include security posts, or “situations justifying reinforced medical surveillance.”
Another proposal is likely to debate. If an employee refuses the post of development proposals, this rejection could be a “genuine and serious cause of dismissal” explains the report. “The inability opens the field of dismissal, denounced Martine Keryer, national secretary, occupational health and disability of the CFE-CGC, following the folder. Take the example of an employee self-service cashier with a herniated disc. She could be so far on a cashier station fitted without handling. Now she will be designated unfit “.
“At the CFE-CGC, we think it is the end of the protection of employees who have a medical condition. And as a company doctor, I find that what is written in this report is unimaginable, she says. The physician will not have the relationship with the patient, since it is the nurse who will make the first follow-up certificate. The report provides an offensive picture of the labor doctor. So far, there was an obligation for employers to comply with medical recommendations adaptation work. A recommendation, it is not the same thing. “