Thank you for inviting me to your conference! I`m honoured to be here, and especially honoured to be your first speaker.

As a representative of the Norwegian ministry in charge of the working environment, I have been asked to say a few words about how the Norwegian authorities address this issue. HÅG has also asked me to say something about the Norwegian model for regulating the working environment, presuming this may differ quite a lot from the German model!

I would also, however, like to make some reflections on the changes that working life is going through in the start-pit of the new millennium. And, finally, I would like to address a topic that has been getting quite a bit of attention in Norway lately – namely the early departure from working life, through long-lasting sick-leave or disablement benefit.

But first – some words about the Norwegian model.

Measures to regulate Norwegian working life is characterised by a strong commitment by the social partners. The unions and the employer’s organisations have traditionally played an important role in shaping the rules and regulations for the working life - and they still do. Not seldom will a specific regulation that concerns the working environment, working hours, etc., have its foundation in a collective agreement that has already been entered into between the main organisations. The authorities’ own initiatives to develop new legislation is always thoroughly discussed with the social partners at an early stage of the process.

This co-operation between the authorities and the social partners, along with the social partners strong commitment, is – I believe - one of the reasons for the overall high standard in the working environment in Norwegian enterprises.

Another reason is perhaps our strategy for developing systematic health, environment and safety activities within the enterprises. Much of the authorities’ efforts have been directed towards this strategy – encouraging the enterprises to develop their own measures for ensuring a good working environment.

The standards of the working environment are stipulated in the Working Environment Act that was adopted in 1977. How to achieve these goals, however, is to a large extent up to the enterprises to develop – in co-operation with their employees. The Regulation relating to Systematic Health, Environment and Safety Activities in Enterprises – or also called the Internal Control Regulations – was adopted in 1996, but the principles were laid down already in 1991, through a provision to much the same extent. The goal of this line of regulation is to achieve good, safe work practices; clear definition and allocation of responsibility; orderly, tidy work premises; safe products and consumer services making for high-quality work and improved performance. Having someone to keep a watchful eye, and take action if something goes wrong, is a pre-condition for maintaining a high standard of work and products.

The idea of this regulation is that the best results are achieved by systematic improvements, not by piecemeal efforts at the last moment. Prevention is better and cheaper than repairs. And that – while the enterprise management must accept its overall responsibility for the working environment – active participation by everyone involved is important to sustain the best possible results. The employees therefore play a key role in the health, environmental and safety activities.

A lot of Norwegian enterprises have come a long way in developing their systematic health, environment and safety activities. This, as I mentioned earlier, must – at least in part - account for the high standard of Norwegian working environment. There is, however, still much work to be done. Especially among the smaller enterprises, there are too many that lag behind in this work. And as long as 57 people die and over 25 000 people are hurt or taken ill as a result of their work, annually, it is self-evident that we must give this topic a lot of focus in the years to come as well.

But how will the world of working life look in the years to come? We hear of the rapid and profound changes that take place in the conditions that shape workplaces and workforces all over Europe. Conditions of technical, economic and social character that will leave us with a working environment that will require other measures than in the past. Are we at risk of seeing numbers of workrelated injuries and illnesses accellerate as a result of this development? Are we able to anticipate the problems tomorrow’s workforce will encounter? And if so, are we able to meet these problems with effective, preventive measures?

Let’s focus, for a moment, on the kind of changes we are encountering.

A committee consisting of the social partners and the authorities in Norway, presented a report shortly before Christmas last year that describes some of the changes that the Norwegian working life is going through. The committee pointed out features like a growing international trade, the very rapid development of the information and communications technology, an increasing use of projects as a way to organise work, new ways of organising the enterprises, and an increasing and changing competition. All aspects that will profoundly influence the way we work and create new challenges for sustaining a good working environment. New technologies, new materials and new forms of organisation of work might reduce old risks, but they can also lead to new problems.

The committee gives a description of the economy that changes somewhat away from the traditional industrial economy, towards a more service-oriented economy. This poses some new challenges for the working environment, especially in the meeting-place between workers and customers. Discontented and sometimes even violent customers can be more of a threat to the health and safety of the worker than hazardous machinery. Which again means that tomorrow’s work-related health-problems will probably be more dominated by psychological traumas rather than physical ones.

The committee also describes a change in the workforce. Apart from it become increasingly more scarce, the workforce as a group is also characterised by an increasing degree of individuality and a higher level of education – 30 percent of the workforce in Norway had a college or university degree in 1998, which is almost twice the number in 1980.

Scarcity in the workforce is becoming an increasing problem in Norway – especially in the ever growing service-sector. Health-care institutions all over Norway are already experiencing short-handedness. With the population growing older every year, we can only expect this problem to increase in the years to come.

This brings me to my next topic – the early departure from working life - because, naturally, in a situation with an increasing scarceness in the workforce, it will be only more important to keep people in their jobs until ordinary retirement.

When I talk of early departure from working life, I am talking about workers on long-lasting sick-leaves or disablement benefit. Statistics show that the numbers for both have steadily increased the last few years. From 1993 to 1999 the number of days that the social security fund covers sick-leave compensation has increased with almost 40 percent. And it is in particular the long-lasting sick-leaves that have increased. The number of persons receiving disablement benefit has increased with 10 percent from 1994 to 1999.

Another Government-appointed committee – also consisting of representatives from the authorities and the social partners, among others – presented its report only last month. This committee concerned itself with this particular topic – how to meet the increase in early departure from working life.

The committee points out several possible reasons for the increase in numbers of sick-leave days or persons receiving disablement benefit, that may together render a sort of explanation.

The committee states that it is likely that a steadily ageing workforce can play a part. It has been calculated that approximately one third of the growth in sick-leave, and approximately one half of the growth in disablement benefits, can be explained through the changes in the age-constellation of the population.

Another aspect might be that in a period of a prosperous economy – as Norway has been experiencing - there are groups that would otherwise have a hard time getting jobs, that are allowed into the jobmarked. These groups can be more likely to go on sick-leave or apply for disablement benefit.

There are also indications that a larger number of people experience stress in their job situation and a lesser degree of self-control – factors that will, of course, influence peoples job satisfaction, and evidently can lead to illnesses.

These are just a few examples of what the committee presents as possible reasons for the increase in early departure from working life. And it is important to bear in mind that none of these factors can explain the increase alone, but they may – to a smaller or larger degree – be part of an explanation.

The committee presents a proposal for a package of measures to meet and fight the development in sick-leave and disablement benefits. The package includes earlier intervention and better follow-ups of persons on sick-leave; a greater focus on people’s working-ability rather than their disability; an extended right to sick-leave without a doctors declaration. In addition the package includes measures for a better co-ordination between public compensation and means to support the enterprises’ own work to reduce sick-leaves; and finally some changes in the sick-leave compensation system.

The committee presents its proposals as a package. That is to say that the measures must be seen as a balanced entirety, and none of the proposals can be expected to have the desired effect alone.

I would like to go back, for a moment, to the last aspect that I mentioned as a possible explanation for the increase in early departure from work – stress and job satisfaction. Because it is perhaps here I see the strongest link towards the topic for this conference, namely the working environment. And it is my belief that the working environment has a strong influence on peoples job satisfaction.

Studies show that a good working environment, where people thrive and feel respected and safe, can serve as a kind of buffer against stress and strain. A good working environment can make the difference between the will to stay on and resignation, even in jobs that are in themselves stressful and strenuous. I’m not saying that we should give up trying to fight stress and strain – although this in it self is very difficult to do through laws and regulations. But I’m saying that we need to work towards an even better working environment to repress the effects of a more rapidly moving society and higher demands for efficiency.

I sincerly wish that I could present you with a solution here today. That I could tell you which measures that could provide a working environment that will encourage people to stay on in their jobs even if they are no longer able to yield 100 percent. I’m sorry to say that I don’t have that one, redeeming answer. But I do believe that we in Norway have at least one effective measure, through our internal control system, which is steadily leading us in the right direction. And where the internal control system was perhaps more directed towards physically hazardous enterprises in the 90’s, I think, in the future, we need to focus on the growing number of enterprises in danger of loosing their workforce because it is burnt out or struggling with psycological problems.

I hope to be able to tell you, in a few years time, that this strategy, along with the measures that the committee proposes, has payed off. That we have been able to turn the numbers for sick-leave and disablement benefit around in Norway.

We all stand before new challenges in the new and changing working life – both public authorities, social partners, enterprises and individuals. I think we stand a better chance of dealing with them if we pull together towards the same goals. And this is not only a Norwegian phenomenon – I believe all of Europe is going through many of the same challenges. We need to learn from each other – across country boarders and across cultural ones. Settings like this conference are valuable opportunities to exchange thoughts and experiences. Communication and co-operation at all levels – let these be my closing words.

Thank you, and good luck with the rest of the conference!