Legislation on protective equipment

2. Legal requirements for protective equipment

2.1. Key legislation on personal protective equipment

– Act XCIII of 1993 on Occupational Safety and Health;
– Decree No.18/2008 (XII. 3.) SZMM on the requirements and certification of conformity of personal protective equipment;
– Decree No.17/2013 (VI. 4.) NGM on the special rules for the designation, activity and inspection of organisations assessing the conformity of personal protective equipment;
– Decree No.65/1999 (XII. 22.) EüM Decree on the minimum safety and health protection requirements for the use of personal protective equipment by workers at the workplace;
– EüM Decree No. 61/1999 (XII. 1.) on the protection of the health of workers exposed to biological agents;
– EüM Decree No. 11/2003 (IX. 12.) on the safety regulations for industrial alpine technical activities;
– EüM Decree No. 16/2000 (VI. 8.) on the implementation of certain provisions of Act CXVI of 1996 on nuclear energy.

Names of personal protective equipment

The term personal protective equipment is used in Act XCIII of 1993 on Occupational Safety and Health (hereinafter referred to as Mvt.). Other legislation uses the terms personal protective equipment or protective equipment . Standards sometimes refer to protective equipment as personal protective equipment . These terms are equivalent.

2.2. Occupational Health and Safety Act requirements

The design, construction, commissioning and operation of workplaces, installations and technologies, as well as the production, manufacture, storage, movement, transport, use, distribution, import and operation of work equipment, materials, energy and personal protective equipment may be carried out in compliance with the requirements laid down in the regulations on occupational safety and health, or, in the absence thereof, with the requirements that can be expected in accordance with the scientific and technical standards [Section 18 (1) of the Mvt.].

The Mvt. stipulates as an employer’s obligation that protective equipment providing protection against hazardous sources must be specified, provided to workers, trained and required [Mvt. 42. § b)].
The employer may not provide the employee with any financial or other compensation in lieu of meeting the requirements of safe and healthy work [Mvt. § l8 (2)]. It follows from the previous provision of the Mvt. that the employer is obliged to provide the employee with personal protective equipment in kind.

Only personal protective equipment that has the necessary conformity assessment certification may be issued to workers. The Mvt. provides for the following in this respect:

Personal protective equipment may be placed on the market or put into service only if it has an EC declaration of conformity or an EC type-examination certificate. The certification of the conformity of personal protective equipment shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Decree of the Minister responsible for employment policy [Section 18 (4) of the Mvt.]

The Mvt. defines the applicability of personal protective equipment on the basis of the principle of degrees of prevention. According to this principle, in work processes where the worker may be exposed to a source of danger, effective protection must be achieved by the use of closed technology, or, if this cannot be achieved, by the use of safety equipment, personal protective equipment and organisational measures, combined where necessary [Mvt. § 44(1)].
Examples: protection against falls from a height and workers at work using more effective safety equipment than personal protective equipment alone.
More effective protection can be achieved by using noise enclosures on noisy machinery than by using hearing protectors.

When implementing safe and healthy working conditions, the employer must take into account the priority of collective technical protection over individual protection as a general requirement [Mvt. 54. § (1) paragraph ( h)].
According to the Mvt., the protection must therefore always favour a technical solution independent of the employee’s will or cooperation. The employer is obliged to take organisational measures and to use protective equipment if the previous requirement cannot be met by a technical solution.

In line with this, the Mvt. also sets a specific requirement:
– If it is technically impossible to provide the air or climate required for the workplace, organisational measures must be taken to protect the health of workers, personal protective equipment must be used and protective drinks must be provided [Section 33 (2) of the Mvt.]. This is one of the cases (mentioned in the Mvt.) where the use of protective equipment is possible, where appropriately selected equipment – primarily respiratory protection – must be provided.

– In the outdoor workplace, the protection of workers against the weather must be ensured by technical solutions, work organisation, personal protection, warming facilities and protective clothing appropriate to the nature of the work and the working conditions [Art. 34 of the Mvt.]. The employer shall decide on the appropriate measures in the light of the circumstances.

In the case of the provision of protective equipment, the employer must in all cases be satisfied that the protection provided by the protective equipment is justified and justified and that the protective equipment has a protective effect against the source of the risk.

The protective equipment must be kept in a condition suitable for its intended use
[Mvt. § 42 c)]. The employer is obliged to ensure that the protective equipment is fit for its intended use, that it is fit for protection, that it is in a satisfactory hygienic condition, that it is cleaned, maintained (repaired) and replaced as necessary [Mvt. 54. § (7) paragraph ( g)].

The Mvt. contains the obligation for the employee to work only in a safe working condition, in compliance with the rules and instructions on occupational safety and in accordance with the occupational safety training. Workers must cooperate with their colleagues and carry out their work in a way that does not endanger their health or the health and safety of others. The Mvt. 60. § (1), one of the most important conditions is that
– the worker uses protective equipment when necessary;
– the protective equipment is used in accordance with its intended purpose and
– the worker takes care of its cleaning as expected of him.

The Mvt. 56. §-the employer shall determine in writing the internal arrangements for the provision of protective equipment. The performance of this task is considered a specialised occupational safety and health activity.

2.3. Requirements for regulations

The general requirements for the provision of protective equipment are set out in Decree 65/1999 (XII. 22.) of the Ministry of Health and Labour on the minimum safety and health protection requirements for the use of protective equipment by workers at work (hereinafter: Decree 65/1999). The scope of the Decree covers, with regard to the safety and health requirements for the use of protective equipment at the workplace

“a) to all employers who are subject to the Mvt. 87. § § 9 of the Employment Contract (hereinafter referred to as “Organised Work”),

(b) to an employee employed by an employer within the meaning of point (a), including employment for the performance of work for the public benefit.”

There are also other legal requirements for personal protective equipment.

2.4. Application of standards

Pursuant to the Mvt., the detailed requirements for personal protective equipment are laid down in separate legislation, regulations (§ 11) and standards [Mvt. § 47].

In the case of protective equipment, the requirements, testing and marking are mainly covered by harmonised standards. A harmonised standard is a technical specification adopted by the European standardisation organisations, the reference number of which has been published by the European Commission in the Official Journal of the European Union and which has been published as a national standard.

A a significant number of harmonised standards are national standards. The national standards are marked with an MSZ symbol in the case of nationally developed standards and with an additional reference to the origin, e.g. MSZ EN, MSZ ISO, in the case of adopted (nationalised) standards.

The conformity assessment testing and certification of personal protective equipment is primarily based on harmonised standards.

^top of page

3. Establishment of an employer’s scheme for the provision of protective equipment

3.1. Risk assessment – internal regulation

Risk assessment – risk assessment

Determining the necessary protective equipment requires a risk assessment or risk evaluation.

The Mvt. 54. § (8), the carrying out of risk assessment is considered as an occupational safety and health activity.

Pursuant to Section 4 (2) aa) of Decree No. 27/1995 (VII. 25.) NM on Occupational Health Services (hereinafter: NM Decree), the Occupational Health Service (hereinafter: Service) shall assist in the identification of sources of danger at the workplace.

The service is involved in determining and assessing the adequacy and necessity of protective equipment by virtue of its statutory obligation, but this does not mean that the employer’s responsibility is in any way diminished. [According to § 4 (4) of the NM Decree, “the provisions of § 4 (1) and (2) shall not affect the employer’s responsibility for the achievement of safe and healthy working conditions as laid down in the Mvt.“] The protective equipment responsibilities of the Service will be discussed later.

The protective equipment must be provided as soon as the risk arises, and the employer must take preventive measures to this end on the basis of the risk assessment.

An example of the provision of protective equipment is given in ISO 12100:2011 Safety of machinery. General principles of design. Risk assessment and risk reduction (ISO 12100:2010). According to clause 6.4.1.2 of this standard ” provide the user with information on the intended use of the machinery, taking careful account of all its modes of operation. The information must include any instructions required for the safe and correct use of the machinery. This must be borne in mind when informing and warning the user of the residual risks. The information must indicate, where applicable, the personal protective equipment required”.
In accordance with point 6.4.4 of this standard, all necessary markings, such as “need to use personal protective equipment”, must be affixed to the machinery.

Example:
The chain speed of a given chainsaw is 16.97 m/s at maximum power, according to the specifications in its instruction manual. The standard EN 381-11:2003 Protective clothing for users of hand-held chainsaws – Part 11: Requirements for upper body protectors ‘5. Classification according to chain speed” states:
“The test according to this standard shall be carried out with one of the four chain speed classes indicated:
Class 0: (16,0 ± 0,2) m/s;
Class 1: (20,0 ± 0,2) m/s;
Class 2: (24,0 ± 0,2) m/s;
Class 3: (28,0 ± 0,2) m/s.”

It follows from the foregoing that the use of the example chainsaw requires the wearing of protective clothing of at least Class 1 according to the standard MSZ EN 381-11:2003.

In the risk assessment, a number of factors need to be considered and taken into account, including, but not limited to, the legal obligation, the standard specification, the process instruction, the safety data sheet, the label of the products, the classification, packaging and labelling of biocidal products (e.g. precautions during use, storage, transport), the authorisation document of the plant protection product, the asbestos removal work plan.

In addition to the protective effectiveness of the protective equipment as determined by risk assessment, the following factors should also be taken into account:

– physiological and ergonomic factors;
– working environment factors (e.g. physical and climatic conditions, outdoor or greenhouse conditions for pesticides);
– working conditions;
– psychological factors;
– compatibility with other protective equipment, work equipment and clothing;
– tasks and personal characteristics of the worker.

The employer should consider at least the following in relation to protective equipment that provides protection against hazards:

– whether protective equipment is provided for all risks;
– whether protective equipment is used to protect all persons at risk;
– whether the use of protective equipment reduces exposure below the exposure limit;
– whether the time limit for the use of protective equipment is appropriate.

In a workplace where there are several risks at the same time, the employer must provide the protective equipment in such a way that the worker is protected against all the risks to which he is exposed. In particular, the Regulation requires the provision of protective equipment offering complex protection. The provision of protective equipment includes the provision of protective equipment for escape and rescue.

The EüM Decree requires that the employer keeps up-to-date records of data on risk assessment, the selection of protective equipment, measurement results, expert opinions and recommendations, and other documents relating to the provision of protective equipment, and presents them to the inspecting authority upon request [Section 3(3) of the EüM Decree].

In most cases, the risk assessment requires instrumental assessment (noise measurement, air pollution measurement, etc.), as the appropriate protective equipment can only be determined on the basis of the measured values.

The employer shall take all reasonable measures, taking into account the specific legislation, to evacuate the workplace in the event of danger, to designate suitable employees for the performance of fire protection and disaster prevention tasks, to determine their number, to train them and to provide them with appropriate personal protective equipment [Section 54/A (2) of the Mvt.].

3.2. Occupational safety and health activities in the protective equipment supply chain

The primary tasks related to protective equipment in the framework of occupational safety and health are:
– carrying out risk assessment [Section 54 (2) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act];
– determining the internal order of the provision of protective equipment [Section 56 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act]; – carrying out routine inspections of protective equipment [Section 23 (2) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act]

The employer may
– perform the tasks classified as occupational safety activities by a person with an occupational safety qualification (at least an intermediate occupational safety qualification),
– perform the tasks classified as occupational health activities by a person with an occupational health [occupational medicine (occupational medicine), occupational hygiene, public health epidemiology, preventive medicine and public health]
qualification [Section 8 of the Occupational Health Act].

As protective equipment can be used against almost all sources of danger – including in particular physical hazards, hazardous substances and biological hazards such as micro-organisms and their metabolites, as well as macro-organisms (plants, animals) – the involvement of the occupational health service is essential.
The Mvt. 58. § Paragraph (1) provides that “In addition to the obligation provided for in Article 57 (1), the employer shall provide basic occupational health services as specified in a separate law and covering all employees (…) in order to perform the duties provided for in Article 56. The occupational health service may be provided by an external service provider operated by the employer or under contract with the employer .” The documents prepared in the framework of the occupational health professional activity are certified by the signature of the service provider to the employer.

The Occupational Health Service, on the basis of Section 4(2)( a) of the NM Decree, but in a manner which is an obligation of the employer, shall contribute to the implementation of the Mvt. 58. §-in the performance of the employer’s duties listed in § § 1 of the Mvt. 23. § (2), § 54 (2), § 56, and tasks constituting a professional activity, in addition to additional tasks relating to protective equipment but not requiring care within the framework of a professional activity.

The employer is therefore obliged to provide adequate personnel to carry out the tasks of occupational safety and health, irrespective of the hazard class or the number of employees.

3.3. Use of an expert – optional

According to the Decree, the employer shall, if necessary, consult an expert for the risk assessment, for the selection of protective equipment providing effective protection and for the establishment of rules for the use of protective equipment. Although it is not common practice for employers to use an expert, it is important to stress that the use of an OSH expert does not exempt the employer from using a person who is qualified in occupational safety and health.

3.4. Persons entitled to personal protective equipment

The scope of the Decree on the safety and health requirements for the use of personal protective equipment at the workplace covers all employers who employ workers in the framework of organised work and workers employed by such employers. The Decree specifically highlights employment for work for the public benefit as an activity that entitles the holder to use protective equipment.

The written arrangements for the provision of protective equipment must cover all persons who may be exposed to risks arising from organised work which cannot be prevented by technical or organisational preventive measures. All persons who are or could be exposed to a hazard (potential hazard), i.e. those who are within the range of the hazard (e.g. visitors, service users, inspectors), must be included. The job role of these persons cannot be defined, but they must be provided with protective equipment against risks arising from the working environment in the internal rules. Particular attention should be paid to the provision of specific protective equipment for workers in vulnerable groups, or for workers with reduced mobility or other physical disabilities (disabled workers).

3.5. Basic responsibilities of the employer and the worker in relation to the use of protective equipment

The Mvt. aims at cooperation between employer and employee, as it defines the rights and obligations of both parties. The worker is obliged to “use the personal protective equipment in accordance with its intended purpose and to ensure that it is cleaned in a manner that he can be expected to clean” [Mvt. 60. § (1) paragraph ( b) ], so he has not only the right to use protective equipment, but also the obligation to do so. The existence of this obligation does not, however, exempt the employer from the obligation to carry out regular checks and, through this obligation from the responsibility for enforcing. Control is a means of prevention.

At the same time, the employee is entitled to require his employer to provide him with the necessary protective equipment for his work [Mvt. 61. § c) ].

In order to ensure safe work that does not endanger health, the employer must ensure in particular the proper usability and protective capacity of protective equipment, its satisfactory hygienic condition, and the necessary cleaning, maintenance (repair) and replacement [Mvt. 54. § (7) paragraph ( g) ].

3.6. Written rules on the arrangements for the allowance

In a separate section, the Mvt. specifically emphasises [Art. 56 Mvt.] that the person with the appropriate qualification is responsible in particular for determining the internal order of the provision of personal protective equipment [Mvt. 57. § (3)(g)].

The employment of such a person, regardless of the form, does not relieve the employer of its responsibility for the implementation of safe and healthy working conditions as laid down in the Mvt.

The employer must have a written policy on the provision of protective equipment, which, on the basis of a risk assessment, must all activities requiring the use of protective equipment must be covered. The Decree explains the tasks covered by the provision of protective equipment, including all the steps from ordering to scrapping. The regulation must be such that all decisions concerning the protective equipment (e.g. on replacement) can be taken without doubt, and all tasks (e.g. ordering, use, inspection or control of protective equipment) can be clearly traced and carried out.
To this end, the person responsible for carrying out each task, by job or other demarcation, the deadline for implementation, the method and number of copies of the necessary documentation must be specified.

Under the requirements of the EüM Regulation, the benefit scheme must include a specific definition of the protective equipment provided, which employers typically summarise in a table. An overview table of the types of hazards for the use of protective equipment is provided in Annex 1 of the EüM Regulation. It is important to note that the table is not exhaustive and is intended as a guide only.

An example of the requirements that may be set out in the table of the order of provision of protective equipment is given in the Annex. It is very important to stress that the annexed table is an example based only on the most common risks of the activity, presented in general terms, and does not include specific risks arising from the work, working conditions, the working environment or the weather.
The contents of the example table can be extended as required, in addition to taking full account of the risks.

As a result of the risk assessment, the employer will know which protective equipment is necessary for the technology and work equipment used and the working conditions present, depending on the job and activity. At this stage, the level of protection afforded by the protective equipment must be determined for each activity and, within this, for each part of the body to be protected against each risk. The level of protection of protective equipment shall include its protective capacity, its class of protection and the degree of protection afforded. These characteristics of the protective equipment indicate the protective properties specified in the relevant standard(s).

The protective capacity indicates the type of risk against which the protective equipment provides protection. Examples include cold, heat, noise, cutting, stabbing and many other risks. The protection class expresses the degree of protection that the protective equipment can provide against the level of risk of the type of risk factor specified in the legislation or standard. The degree of protection is a classification of protective equipment which can be established within or independently of the protection class to characterise the degree of protection afforded in relation to a given type of risk factor. (These are the characteristics used in the conformity assessment certification of protective equipment. Not all standards for protective equipment establish all the characteristics or do not always refer to them by the same name.)

The employer can increase the incentive to use a so-called complex protective device to protect several parts of the body against the risks in the presence of several risks at the same time. This could be, for example, a helmet with an integrated hearing protection and face protection with an unbreakable link. This has a number of advantages, one of which is that the worker cannot eliminate the protection he needs.
The marking of the protective capacity of complex protective equipment includes all the markings specified separately in the standards applied to the PPE. Individual pieces of complex protective equipment, such as helmets, eye protection and hearing protection, may in themselves provide protection against several risks.

Employers do not always fully specify the protective equipment required according to the risks. Experience has shown that the most commonly forgotten protective equipment is cold-protective jackets, sunglasses (for example for drivers) – with the exception of corrective sunglasses that do not provide specific risk protection – dioptric goggles, closed protective clothing for use near moving machinery parts, and ergonomically necessary protective equipment.

Of course, the jobs should be further broken down according to the working environment in which they are performed. Welding can be carried out indoors or outdoors, which means different lighting conditions and therefore different light levels and different goggles may be required. The slightest variation in the type and extent of risks must be taken into account, because the level of protection afforded by protective equipment is also very diverse. It is recommended to find the optimum protection, i.e. to achieve protection by means of protective equipment that is proportionate to the immediate risk.

The Health and Safety at Work Regulation requires employers to assess the suitability of the protective equipment they plan to purchase before selecting it. This means that the employer must compare the level of protection provided by the protective equipment to be purchased with the characteristics required to be effective against the risks at the workplace, i.e. with what is specified in the regulation.

An important stage in the provision of protective equipment is the ordering or purchase of such equipment, so it is advisable to use the services of a person who is a specialist in occupational safety and health and has the necessary expertise in this area. It is important to stress that occupational health and safety service provides counselling on protective equipment as part of the basic service, as defined in a separate act [NM Decree No. 4 (1) (d)).

The employer must specify in its internal regulations at least:
– the direction of protection, i.e. the part of the body to be covered and protected by the protective equipment;
– the level of protection of the protective equipment (the overall protection characteristic of the protective equipment);
– the relevant standard and the characteristics required by the standard for the level of protection.

The symbol (pictogram) and the category of protective equipment do not have to be indicated in the internal rules. However, it is recommended to list any additional required features of the protective equipment that are not included in its level of protection (see later).

3.7. Selection of personal protective equipment

In the employer’s internal regulations, the identification of protective equipment means the indication of the level of protection based on the nature and extent of the risks to which the worker is exposed, by body part. The level of protection is identified by the number of the standard that specifies the requirement for the protective equipment and the identification codes (letter or number or a combination of these) specified in the standard. This requires, for example, in the case of safety footwear with a nose strap, at least the following information to be included in the regulation: the standard ISO 20345 S3.

The risk present may require additional protective features from the footwear, for example to prevent the sole from being punctured by metal shavings. In this case, footwear with a plate in the sole is required to provide penetration resistance. Penetration resistance is indicated by the letter P, so in the regulation it should be written next to the protective capability of the footwear, but in this case it is superfluous because S3 already includes this feature.

The situation is different if only S2 is included in the regulation, but there is a risk of metal shavings penetrating. In this case, the letter P must be indicated separately in the regulation, as protection against penetration will not be ensured if this is not done.

Examples of definitions of protective equipment:

Example 1:

Protection level: MSZ EN 143:2001 P3
Protective capability: type of risk – protection against solid and liquid particles classified as toxic and strong toxic.
Protection class: the degree of protection achieved – P (meaning particle filter).
Protection level: the degree of protection against the level of risk: 3 (meaning: against solid and liquid particles classified as toxic and strong toxic up to a high filtration efficiency of max. 1 % tf concentration)
P and 3 are designations according to the relevant standard, in this case EN 143, and can only be interpreted in terms of the type of risk on the basis of this standard. The same letter or number or a combination of letters or numbers has a different meaning in other standards. The P3 marking for the example respiratory protection has no relation to the protection provided by the P symbol (which cannot be assigned a number to the letter P) for the safety footwear described above, which is part of the professional footwear.

To describe the level of protection of the protective equipment, it may be necessary to specify additional characteristics in the internal rules. In the example shown, such characteristics may include:
– whether a valved or valveless filter is required;
– whether it should be fitted with built-in particulate filter(s) or replaceable particulate filter(s);
– whether it should be an energy-operated (air is supplied by an air assist device) particulate filter or a non-energised one;
– with an impact-resistant housing (otherwise, if the filter falls off, the internal carbon layer will be rearranged, which may create air pockets, impairing the protection capability).

Example 2:

To indicate the level of protection, it is not sufficient to simply say “helmet” or “safety helmet”, as this does not clearly define the protection required. There are, for example, fire-fighting helmets, motorcycle helmets, helmets for foresters, electrically insulating helmets for use in low-voltage electrical installations, helmets for alpine engineering.

With regard to head protection, a distinction should be made primarily between industrial helmets according to ISO EN 397:2012 and industrial headgear according to ISO EN 812:2012. Helmets called “industrial headgear” do not protect against the impact of falling objects and are therefore not suitable for use, for example, in construction workplaces.

According to a work accident, after cleaning out the cellar, the floor was being deepened and the cellar vault collapsed, burying two workers who were not wearing hard hats. The protective helmet required in this case would have been an industrial helmet with protection against lateral deformation.

Example 3:

Protective equipment for escape and rescue must not be used during work.

Example 4:

Internal regulation is inappropriate if the protective equipment is defined on the basis of a basic standard for only one family of protective equipment. These standards are not applicable on their own (e.g. MSZ EN 420:2003+A1:2010 Protective gloves. General requirements and test methods), as they do not contain a requirement for the specific protective performance of the protective equipment.

Example 5:

The provision of protective clothing instead of work clothing is a very common irregularity among employers. This is particularly the case for activities in outdoor workplaces that are considered cold (delivery workers, some security guards, etc.).
It is also common for workers to work in protective clothing (MSZ EN 510:1994) rather than wearing protective clothing around moving machinery parts. The following diagrams show the design of protective clothing according to the standard taken as an example.

Example 6:

Work equipment and other equipment not covered by protective equipment and provided as a benefit should not be included in the benefit scheme. For example, climbing irons, glasses for sharp vision for work in front of a screen, dioptric glasses without a protection level, dioptric sunglasses without a protection level or the aforementioned work clothing are not protective equipment. (Section 2(2) of the EüM Regulation lists the products which are not considered protective equipment by the employer.)

Example 7:

Some legislation (for example, Decree 15/1989 (X. 8.) of the Ministry of Forestry and Forestry Protection on the issue of the Forest Safety Code) refers to certain protective equipment by names that are no longer up-to-date. Examples of such names are work belt, safety harness, safety belt, forest helmet.

The “work belt” according to the withdrawn standard MSZ 1502:1988 Work belt is no longer produced and marketed, instead the workplace adjustment waist belt according to MSZ EN 358:2003 is used. The “safety belt” shall be understood as “work belt”.
The “safety harness” according to the withdrawn standard MSZ 16677:1988 Safety harness is no longer manufactured and marketed, but the full body harness according to MSZ EN 361:2003 is used instead.

The helmet according to the withdrawn standard MSZ-08-0589:1979 Forestry safety helmet is no longer produced and marketed, but an industrial safety helmet according to MSZ EN 397:2012, designed and equipped for forestry activities, is used instead.

3.8. Providing workers with protective equipment

Once the employer has carried out the above tasks, it must provide workers with protective equipment appropriate to the risks and ensure that it is available at all times to enable them to work.

Legislation does not make it compulsory, but gives preference to personal use, i.e. a personalised protective equipment allowance. This solution increases wearing discipline and confidence in the protective equipment, reduces hygiene problems and reduces wear and tear of protective equipment. Providing personal protective equipment makes the allowance more transparent and is expected to increase worker discipline.

The definition of protective equipment should also include the aspect that, while ensuring the degree of protection, the protective equipment should cause the worker as little discomfort as possible and that it should be used as much as possible within the limits of reasonableness.

For example, there are significant differences in the weight of goggles – as little as 25 grams for a single lens – with the same protection. Staying with goggles, it is not necessary to wear two pairs of goggles when providing corrective lenses for workers requiring corrective l enses, or to wear corrective lenses on top of or over goggles or under goggles. For UV protection, there are both corrective (dioptric) goggles that can be worn over corrective goggles and corrective goggles.

Employers are expected to provide protective equipment appropriate to the level of physical work carried out by the worker and the climatic environment in all cases. A further consideration in the selection of protective equipment is therefore the working environment in which it is to provide protection (e.g. hearing protection in a hot and humid workplace or a cold and dusty workplace) and the protective capacity in which it is to be effective (e.g. wearing protective gloves when carrying bricks or opening crates with nails in them). Protective equipment should always be used within its specified limits of use (protection capability, protection level, protection class).

Determining the conditions for the use of protective equipment, and in particular the limitation of the duration of wearability, requires taking into account the following aspects in the first instance:
– the severity of the risk;
– the frequency of exposure to the risk;
– the characteristics of the workplace of each worker;
– the performance and effectiveness of the protective equipment;
– the degree of additional workload caused by the wearing of protective equipment.

An example of the level of protection of a complex protective device and its corresponding marking could be:
MSZ EN 397 MM, LD, MSZ EN 166 1FC, MSZ EN 352-3 SNR
Interpretation of the marking:

MSZ EN 397 MM, LD	LD Lateral deflection
	MM Melt splashing
MSZ EN 166 1F, C	F Low energy impact 45 m/s
	(Applicable to all types of eye protection)
	C Correct colour recognition
MSZ EN 352-3	SNR: 23 dB

4. Conformity assessment certification of personal protective equipment

Employers are obliged to comply with the relevant provisions of Decree No. 18/2008 (XII. 3.) of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs of the Republic of Hungary on the requirements and certification of conformity of personal protective equipment (hereinafter: the “SMP Decree”).
The provisions of the SMP Decree are consumer protection provisions for the purposes of the Consumer Protection Act.

Protective equipment against ionising radiation

Pursuant to Section 1 (2) of Decree No. 18/2008 (XII. 3.) of the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs of the Republic of Hungary, special legislation applies to the testing and certification of the conformity of protective equipment against ionizing radiation. This special legislation is Decree No. 16/2000 (VI. 8.) of the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Labour on the implementation of certain provisions of Act CXVI of 1996 on Atomic Energy.

4.1. Conformity assessment certification documents

Failure by the manufacturer or the formulator or the importer to comply with the requirements for placing on the market does not exempt the employer from the obligation to comply with the requirements for the use of protective equipment. The employer shall be responsible for compliance with the rules on health and safety at work and for ensuring that the requirements for safe and healthy working conditions are met.

In all cases, the protective equipment must have an EC declaration of conformity as a condition of use or, where appropriate, one of the following documents:
– certificate of adequacy;
– EC type-examination certificate.

In § 6 (1) the EüM Regulation refers to a “type certificate”, which in the application of the EüM Regulation means the documents described above.

It is important to emphasise that the certificate issued for the manufacturing system of the protective equipment does not replace the conformity assessment certification document specified for the protective equipment.

The information on the protective equipment varies depending on the document on the basis of which it was placed on the market. The information on the protective equipment in use must clearly indicate the origin of the protective equipment and the category to which it has been assigned by the manufacturer. The categorisation of protective equipment is summarised in Article 4 of the SMP Regulation.

The ability of a protective device with non-compliant documentation to provide protection is in doubt. Such protective equipment may give workers a false sense of security, while it may not have the level of protection indicated by the manufacturer on the protective equipment or the level of protection may not have been certified on the basis of the authorisation.

EC Declaration of Conformity

Only Category 1 protective equipment manufactured in the EEA States can be used with an EC declaration of conformity (i.e. without the obligation to obtain an EC type certificate). For domestically manufactured protective equipment, this rule will only apply from 1 May 2004. The employer is not required to have the EC declaration of conformity [Article 5(5)( c) of the PPE Regulation].

The following information is mandatory on the EC declaration of conformity:
– name or identification of the manufacturer or its authorised representative established in the territory of the EEA States;
– name or numbered identification of the protective equipment (brand, type, serial number, article number, model number, etc.);
– number of the harmonised standard applicable to the protective equipment;
– category of the protective equipment.

The particulars in the EC declaration of conformity shall be supplemented, in the case of protective equipment with an EC type-examination certificate, by the number of the EC type-examination certificate and, in the case of category 3 protective equipment, by the identification number of the notified certification body.

The content of the EC Declaration of Conformity is uniform across the EEA countries, but there are differences in form.

EC type certificate

EC type certificate is mandatory for category 1 protective equipment manufactured outside the territory of the EEA States and for all protective equipment in categories 2 and 3, if the protective equipment is placed on the market for the first time in the Republic of Hungary and is not subject to a specific legislation.

The employer is not required to hold an EC type certificate.[According to § 11 (4) of the SZMM Regulation: “The certifier shall, at the request of the user, allow the user to inspect the EC type-examination certificate of the protective equipment, in the form of a copy.”]

EC marking and symbol

EC mark

The EC marking affixed to protective equipment indicates conformity with the essential requirements and conformity with the harmonised standards or technical solutions which meet the essential requirements. It includes the identification number of the notified inspection body involved in the verification of the category 3 protective equipment as a finished product, the letters and information “CE”, conformity with the chosen specification (the basis for the free movement of products is the CE conformity marking, which in the case of protective equipment is the EC marking).
The EC marking is primarily information for the inspection authorities. It may not be used for any indication of quality, brand advertising or any other purpose incompatible with conformity.

The EC marking must be affixed in a clearly legible and indelible manner to all protective equipment and to all components which can be dismantled or placed on the market separately, and must be clearly visible and indelible throughout the expected period of use of the protective equipment.
The affixing of the EC marking on the packaging is permitted where the size or characteristics of the protective equipment do not allow it.

Logo

The symbol is a representation (pictogram) to assist in the interpretation of the level of protection specified in the EC marking of the protective equipment in accordance with the applicable harmonised standard. The symbol is not part of the EC marking.

Certificate of qualification

Protective equipment with a qualification certificate issued by the National Labour Inspectorate (OMMF), which is the legal predecessor of the Directorate, for a maximum period of validity of 3 years, must have the safety test mark and information according to the now repealed Decree 2/1995 (I. 6.) of the SzCsM, and must be accompanied by a safety information leaflet. The EC marking is not permitted for protective equipment with a certificate of conformity.
The safety test mark shall include the name, mark or identification of the manufacturer, the number of the certificate of conformity and the type number. Protective equipment may not be supplied on the basis of a certificate of conformity as from 29 April 2007.
Protective equipment may not have two marketing authorisations at the same time (therefore the certificate of conformity could not be replaced by either the EC declaration of conformity or the EC type certificate during its period of validity).

The employer does not need to have the qualification certificate.

4.2. Factsheet

A prerequisite for fitness for purpose is that the employer must have the protective equipment, known as information leaflet and make its contents known to the worker. The information leaflet is part of the protective equipment and contains information on its storage, handling, maintenance, cleaning and periodic inspection. [Mvt. § 2 (4), SZMM Verordnung § 3 (14), § 5 (5) e), § 10 (2), § 11 (6), and Annex 3, point 1.4].

The leaflet must include the meaning of the EC marking and symbol affixed to the protective equipment. The notified certification body issuing the EC type-examination certificate shall check the information document in the course of its duties.

The employer must have a leaflet on the protective equipment and make it available to the worker. The leaflet must be drawn up in an official language accepted in the Member State in which the protective equipment is placed on the market. In the case of workers who do not speak English, the information shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Mvt. 39. § (2) of the Act (“If the workplace is occupied by employees who do not speak Hungarian, the employer shall provide the operating documentation, signs indicating hazards, prohibitions and information in a language understood by the employee.”).

^top of page

5. Product safety aspects

Protective equipment with design defects may comply with legislation and standards in all respects, but their design still poses a risk to the user. If the employer establishes that the protective equipment as a product has a design defect (type defect) which directly jeopardises healthy and safe working conditions, he may initiate a consumer protection order.

^top of page

6. Commissioning

In the case of protective equipment, the law or the Guide may require an installation procedure. Decree No 11/2003 (IX. 12.) of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management on the safety regulations for industrial alpine technical activities 4. § (3) states that “The Mvt. 21. §-the operation of alpine technology as a hazardous technology, hazardous workplace must be ordered in writing. In the course of the preliminary investigation from the point of view of occupational safety and health and in accordance with Mvt. 54. § (2), the necessary authorisations for the nature of the work (e.g. a fire permit) must also be obtained.”

^top of page

7. Usage aspects

In workplaces or work areas, in hazardous work processes and technologies, where the worker or a person present (e.g. an employee of another employer) or persons within the scope of work are exposed to a source of danger, the provisions of Mvt. 42. § b).

If the employer has prescribed and provided for the use of protective equipment, but the workers or other persons present at the workplace do not use it or do not use it as intended, the workers may be held liable, but this does not relieve the employer of its obligation.

There is no legal requirement for the employer to have the employee sign a document confirming receipt of the protective equipment. In this respect, the provision of internal rules may be relevant, as the employer’s provision to this effect, as a way of implementing the requirements of safe and healthy working conditions, constitutes a rule on occupational safety and health.

The provision of protective equipment is not considered complete if the employer does not provide the necessary conditions for the proper use of the protective equipment. This includes, for example, failure to designate load-bearing structures or anchorage points where the worker can secure the protective equipment with adequate safety.

The Mvt. 82. § (2) ( e) of the Act provides that the life, physical integrity or health of a worker is seriously endangered in particular by “ the inoperability or absence of the necessary safety equipment or personal protective equipment“.

An important aspect of the provision of protective equipment is to ensure that the worker does not use protective equipment that could interfere with work. For example, protective gloves in accordance with standard EN 388:2003 should not be worn in places where there is a risk of entrapment by moving machine parts. A work accident occurred while drilling with protective gloves according to the standard because the worker’s hand came close to the drill head, which caught the protective gloves and the worker’s hand was seriously injured.

The protective equipment must provide protection throughout its use. A significant proportion of protective equipment can be visually or tactilely inspected and checked against the requirements of the information document to determine whether it meets this requirement.

One of the employer’s most important tasks is to check the use of protective equipment. Checking proper use includes checking that the worker is wearing protective equipment suited to his or her physical abilities.
Full body harnesses with large fall protection are not a reliable protection for a particularly thin, short worker. A head helmet that is not the right size for the worker’s head cannot fit properly on the head, so its protective effectiveness is uncertain. In a specific case, a worker was injured at work because the safety goggles were not adjusted to the worker’s face and therefore an object flying into the worker’s eyes during sanding.

All protective gloves should allow the fingers to move as much as possible according to the purpose for which the gloves are used. For example, protective gloves for welders should be designed to suit the performance of the are divided into two types, which are:
Type A : lower mobility (with higher other performance),
Type B : higher mobility (with lower other performance).
(Type B is recommended for AVI welding, for example. )

Protective equipment is considered unfit for its intended use – i.e. it is inoperative – if, for example, it is badly worn, torn, damaged or for any other reason unable to perform its protective function to the full, it does not meet the requirements.

Criteria for checking inoperability may include, for example:

– that all parts of the protective equipment which come into contact or are likely to come into contact with the user during use are free from roughness, sharp edges, protrusions, which may cause excessive irritation or injury;
– the protective equipment is adequately adapted to the user’s physical capabilities in all appropriate ways, its adjustment and securing devices are adequately adjustable or can be satisfactorily adjusted to the user’s body dimensions;
– the protective equipment allows free movement;
– the protective equipment does not temporarily leave the surface to be protected uncovered.

The employer must specify the conditions under which protective equipment is stored and check that it is kept.

The conditions of storage of protective equipment to be used during work must be checked by the worker’s line manager during daily inspections.

Experience with user discipline

The Board also commissioned a nationwide, nearly one-year target study on maintenance-related hazards and risks, which was completed in August 2011. Its findings included the following:

– 3% of workers performing maintenance activities were not wearing personal protective equipment provided by their employer.
– The document regulating the provision of personal protective equipment did not or only incompletely cover the personal protective equipment to be provided during maintenance activities for 22% of the employers audited.

During maintenance

As part of an EU campaign, the Directorate investigated the use of hazardous substances in domestic woodworking plants. It was found that employers gave priority to individual protection over collective protection, but that adequate personal protective equipment was not always provided.

^top of page

8. Out-of-order inspection

The Mvt. 23. § (2) ( a) “the workplace, personal protective equipment, work equipment or technology must be subject to an unannounced inspection by the operating employer if it has directly endangered the health and safety of the worker during its normal use or if an accident at work has occurred in connection with it.“
Depending on the nature of the hazard, the inspection is considered to be an occupational safety or occupational health activity.

The primary objective of the external inspection of protective equipment is to determine whether the risks involved are:
– the appropriate level of protection was provided;
– the parts of the worker’s body exposed to the risk were protected by the protective equipment;
– the protective equipment was used as intended;
– the protective equipment maintained its level of protection;
– cleaning, maintenance and repair of the protective equipment was carried out;
– whether the protective equipment has been periodically inspected and, on the basis of this inspection, continued use of the protective equipment was permitted;
– whether the worker was fit to use the protective equipment as intended;
– whether an incident occurred before the accident at work.

When carrying out an external inspection of protective equipment, the employer must, in its internal regulations, primarily examine the aspects of the professionalism of its selection and use. This does not include aspects relating to the requirements for certification of the conformity assessment of protective equipment, but only the examination of compliance with the requirements set out in the information document.

^top of page

9. Periodic review

Some of the protective equipment should be subject to periodic inspection. This necessarily includes fall protection equipment, respiratory protective equipment, full-body protection equipment, most electrotechnical protective gloves, for which the specific intervals for inspections are communicated to employers in the information notice.

The longest intervals for inspections are set by manufacturers, but some protective equipment is subject to inspection by law, standard or certification (formerly certification). According to § 13(6) of the SMP Regulation: “At the request of the user, the periodic inspection of the protective equipment shall be carried out by the manufacturer or a notified body.”

The employer must provide documentary evidence of the review. There is no uniform requirement for the document. No EC declaration of compliance should be issued following a periodic inspection.

^top of page

10. Cleaning, maintenance, repair

The Mvt. 54. § (7) ( g), the employer must ensure that the protective equipment is fit for its intended purpose, that it remains in a protective condition, that it is in a satisfactory state of hygiene, that it is cleaned, maintained (repaired) and, if necessary, replaced. The procedures for cleaning, maintenance and repair must be laid down in the internal regulations.

Improperly performed cleaning, maintenance or repair can cause the loss or significant reduction of the protection level of the protective equipment. Workers must clean their protective equipment only to the extent that they are expected to do so, and only at their place of work, during and after their activities.

Single-use” protective equipment cannot be cleaned. (The term “single-use” does not necessarily mean that the protective equipment should not be used again after it has been discontinued. If the type and extent of contamination does not preclude it, the protective equipment may be re-used, for example in the case of hearing protection equipment). Protective equipment which cannot be re-used is, for example, protective equipment contaminated with hazardous substances or exposed to biological hazards.

In the case of shared protective equipment, the employer must ensure that sharing does not pose a health or hygiene risk to users. There is no legal requirement for employers to provide all workers with new protective equipment. Where a worker is provided with protective equipment (such as footwear) already used by another person, the employer must take appropriate measures to avoid any risk to health or hygiene.

The reduction of the health or hygiene risk of protective equipment must be ensured by the use of an occupational health professional to develop and implement the procedure set out in the protective equipment provision scheme. Pursuant to Article 4(2)( ab) of the NM Regulation, the service shall contributes to the solving occupational health, physiology, ergonomics and hygiene problems.

For protective clothing, it is typical to specify the number of cleanings allowed and the method of cleaning, after which further use is not allowed. The employer must therefore keep a record of the number of cleanings, otherwise there is no documentary evidence in his possession to prove that the protective clothing can be used.

An aspect of the cleaning method for protective clothing that may be considered is whether the protective clothing can be cleaned by household or industrial laundering. A significant proportion of employers are not prepared for industrial washing and therefore use an external service. In this case, the employer can prove that the cleaning has been carried out professionally by means of a document from the service provider.
Maintenance and repair of protective equipment by the employer is only permitted to the extent specified in the information leaflet and, where applicable, only on specific parts of the protective equipment.

^top of page

11. Replacement of protective equipment

The protective device has no expiry date. (Expiry date is not a term used for protective devices.)

The protective device must be replaced immediately if it becomes unusable or if there is a rapid and obvious change in its performance. A change in the protective characteristic means loss of functionality. This is considered to be the case, for example, if:

– the protective equipment has been involved in an accident at work, even if there are no visible signs of damage;
– the periodic inspection has revealed that the protective equipment has lost its level of protection;
– the protective equipment has sustained visible damage;
– it has been contaminated with an irremovable pollutant that may affect its protective capacity;
– the protective equipment has become obsolete or outdated, or its useful life has expired (together referred to as ‘service life’).

The replacement of the protective equipment is compulsory at the end of the period or deadline for discontinuing its use set by the manufacturer from the date of manufacture. Where applicable, this is independent of the apparent condition of the protective equipment or whether the protective equipment has been in use. The replacement of a protective device is necessitated by anticipated changes in its material (e.g. cracks or discolouration on the surface of a thermoplastic helmet are clear signs of ageing) or by factors adversely affecting the properties of the material (e.g. storage conditions, use, cleaning, inspection, maintenance). This may be expressed by the manufacturer by a recommendation to establish a service life, a limitation of the period of use or a maximum period of use.

For example, the year and quarter of manufacture must be permanently marked on the protective helmet, so that the employer can check the expiry date.

For some respiratory protection filters, the permissible use time is set by a standard, but may be substantially reduced by the working conditions, the degree of difficulty of the work and the capabilities of the person using the filter.

Examples:
The NO-P3 special filter should always be marked with the following sentence:
“Single use only.”

The HG-P3 type filter should always be marked with the following sentence:
“Longest use 50 hours.”

If the manufacturer has not specified the exact lifetime of the protective equipment, the employer should take into account any useful information on the suitability of the protective equipment provided by the manufacturer in the information leaflet. In determining when the protective equipment can reasonably be expected to wear out, account should be taken of the quality of the model, the actual conditions of storage, use, cleaning and maintenance, as indicated by the manufacturer in the information leaflet.

With a few exceptions, there is no time limit on the time of use for the types of respiratory protection filters, so it is up to the worker’s perception to recognise when the filter is exhausted (for example, an increase in breathing resistance makes the device painful to use). However, the shelf life of the filter cartridges is not the same as the time of use of the filter. Filter cartridges (particulate, gas, combination filters) are sealed by the manufacturer and should be stored unopened in a clean place at constant room temperature. The shelf life (expiry date, expiry date) of gas and combined filters is indicated on the filter cartridge (MSZ EN 136 and MSZ EN 140 require a year of manufacture, MSZ EN 149 and MSZ EN 405 require a year of manufacture and a storage period or expiry date). This information must be taken into account by the employer.

In non-installed workplaces, it is particularly important to ensure that protective equipment is replaced without delay.

^top of page

12. Protective equipment classified as hazardous waste

The use of hazardous substances and dangerous preparations, and activities involving biological agents, are unavoidable in many industries (e.g. chemical industry, agriculture), which represent an additional source of danger when handling the protective equipment used. It is the responsibility of the employer to treat any protective equipment that cannot be reused as hazardous waste and to ensure that it is stored separately (e.g. from other clothing).

However, there are substances that are considered hazardous waste, such as pesticide residues, and protective equipment contaminated during work with them can be cleaned up if the conditions for disposal of hazardous waste are met.

Article 7 of the EüM Regulation states that ” Protective equipment that has lost its protective capacity can no longer be used. Worn protective equipment must be treated as waste or, in the cases specified in specific legislation, as hazardous waste .”
Pursuant to Section 8 (2) of Decree 61/1999 (XII. 1.) of the Ministry of Health and Labour on the protection of the health of workers exposed to biological agents, the employer must ensure that

“a) the worker removes protective equipment which may have been contaminated by biological agents when leaving the work area and stores it separately from other clothing until the measures referred to in point (b) have been taken,
(b) the protective equipment referred to in point (a) is cleaned or destroyed as necessary.”

Pursuant to Article 5 (1) ( d) of Government Decree 98/2001 (VI. 15.) on the conditions for carrying out activities related to hazardous waste, “All activities which generate hazardous waste shall be planned and carried out in such a way that the hazardous waste is handled in full compliance with the rules on occupational health and safety.”

Paragraph (3) of the same Article of this Government Decree stipulates that “The holder of hazardous waste shall ensure the safe collection of hazardous waste generated on his property, premises or in the course of his activities until the hazardous waste is handed over to the operator.”

The employer must store the protective equipment classified as hazardous waste in the workplace in a container that does not pollute the environment, and keep a logbook and records of the operation of the facilities and equipment used for the storage and treatment of such equipment and keep records and provide data on them.

^top of page

13. Training in the use of protective equipment

Employers must provide workers with training on the use of protective equipment and practice the use of protective equipment. The employer must continuously check that workers comply with the information and training on the use of the protective equipment in the working conditions (e.g. humidity, sunshine, air speed, convective heat). The hazards of a technological change (e.g. the construction of a new shaft) must be taught, including the use of the necessary protective equipment (e.g. fall protection, respirators, helmets).

When a new type of protective equipment is required, the training and necessary practice must be repeated for all workers concerned. For example, the correct way of putting on a particular protective clothing, the correct sequence of putting on the different parts of a protective clothing consisting of several parts and their fitting together, aspects of checking closures after putting on the protective clothing, etc. may be important. Replacement of the type of protective equipment already in use does not justify repeated training.

If the protective equipment bears a symbol of an open book with the letter ‘i’, this means that the leaflet contains important information that must be read and explained in the context of training.

The EüM Regulation requires documentation of education. The employer must document the information and practical training in writing and have it signed by the employee. The document must be presented to the employer at the request of the labour inspectorate. Attention must be paid to the provisions of Mvt. 55. §, and accordingly, it is necessary to indicate the subject matter in order to carry out the training.

The training is not linked to an occupational safety and health qualification, but it is recommended to entrust it to a specialist who is familiar with the technology and working conditions, as well as with the theoretical and practical aspects of the use of the protective equipment used.

^top of page

14. Removal of protective equipment from the workplace

In the case of a changing workplace, the worker does not start and finish his daily work in the same place, so he could only keep his protective equipment in a workplace that is considered permanent at a disproportionate cost. In such a case, the employer shall authorise the worker to remove the protective equipment from the workplace on a named basis. The employer may issue such an authorisation if the necessary conditions are met, i.e. at least if the protective equipment does not contain toxic contamination, has not been used for protection against biological risks and is not damaged during removal from the workplace [Section 8(2) of the EüM Decree].

^top of page

15. Fitness for employment test

The employer must certify the worker’s suitability to use protective equipment on the basis of a medical examination. Annex 14 of NM Decree No. 33/1998 (VI. 24.) on the medical examination and assessment of fitness for work, occupational and personal hygiene, point 22 of the Annex to the Decree on the referral for medical examination of fitness for work, point 22 of the Annex to NM Decree No. 33/1998 (VI. 24.) includes “exposure to protective equipment” as a risk. The risks to the worker are given to the doctor by the employer.
The following obligation is contained in § 5 (2) of the Medical Regulation:
“The employer, in establishing the arrangements for the provision of protective equipment
d) take into account the health (individual) suitability conditions for the use of the protective equipment and the health limits of its use.

With regard to the expert opinion on employability, the scope of the NM Decree 33/1998 (24.VI.) covers the employer who establishes an employment relationship for seasonal work or casual work within the scope of simplified employment.
The determination of the employment restrictions under which the employee may work in the case of seasonal work and casual work within the scope of simplified employment is made in the framework of the expert opinion on employability.
Although an employability opinion is not always a mandatory condition for employment, it is recommended that employers initiate an employability assessment for seasonal or casual work requiring a protective device and covered by the simplified employment scheme.

Pursuant to Article 6 of Act LXXV of 2010 on Simplified Employment, “In the case of simplified employment, the employer must ensure that the employee is fit to perform the work before starting the work.”

^top of page

16. Safety and health signs to be used at the workplace

If the hearing or vision of the workers concerned is impaired at the workplace, for example because they are wearing personal protective equipment, this should be taken into account when choosing and applying the safety sign. Where the wearing or use of personal protective equipment is necessary, the employer is obliged to use a special sign. [Decree No 2/1998 (I. 16.) of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs on safety and health signs to be used at the workplace.]

A mandatory sign is a safety sign that prescribes certain behaviour and is blue in colour. In our case it means “Personal protective equipment mandatory“.

Safety goggles are mandatory

^top of page

17. Role of the safety representative in the provision of personal protective equipment

The rights ofthe labour representative include the rightto be convinced that the tasks of individual protection are being carried out. The safety and health representative – in accordance with Mvt. 70. § – has the right to verify that the requirements of safe and healthy working conditions are met in the workplace, in particular

– on the safe condition of workplaces, work equipment and personal protective equipment [Section 72 (1) of the Mvt.].

^top of page

18. Rights of the occupational safety and health authority and the inspector of the occupational safety and health authority

Among the inspection powers of the OSH authority, the Mvt. also mentions the enforcement of the requirements on protective equipment, according to which the inspector of the OSH authority is entitled to

– suspend the operation and use of work equipment and personal protective equipment if it does not have the document specified in paragraphs (3) to (4) of Article 18 [Mvt. 84. § (1) paragraph ( j) ].

In this regard, the inspector may order the immediate enforcement of his decision
[Section 84 (3) of the Mvt.].

The OSH authority shall impose an OSH fine on an employer who fails to comply with the requirements for safe and healthy work and thereby seriously endangers the life, physical integrity or health of workers [Section 82 (1) of the Labour Code].

The Mvt. classifies the inoperability (unsuitability) or absence of personal protective equipment as a direct and serious risk to the life, health or physical integrity of the worker [Section 63 (2) of the Mvt.].

– the employee has the right to refuse to work (Section 63 (1) of the Mvt.); or
– an employment protection fine may be imposed (Mvt. 82. § (2) paragraph ( e) ].

^top of page