~ Le Viêt Nam, aujourd'hui. ~
The Vietnam News

[Year 1997]
[Year 1998]
[Year 1999]
[Year 2000]
[Year 2001]

Vietnam workers pay a deadly price

HO CHI MINH CITY - Workplace accidents are occurring more frequently in Vietnam and claiming at least one life each day, say officials. Employers blame the worsening situation to workers' ignorance and irresponsibility, but labor groups and government officials say it is the company bosses who need to shape up. Indeed, they say, employers across the country are simply neglecting safety standards in the workplace.

Official data indicate that work-related accidents have escalated in Vietnam's main industry hubs - Ho Chi Minh City, Hai Phong and Thai Nguyen - in the past five years. In the first six months of 2000 alone, there were 1,418 accidents, or 23 percent more than in the same period of 1999. These accidents resulted in 174 deaths and 443 serious injuries out of a total of 1,479 victims. In Ho Chi Minh City, unofficial statistics show that 281 labor accidents have already occurred this year, with 17 people killed and 280 wounded. Losses have amounted to some 400 million dong, or about US$28,570. Of these accidents, 156 were caused by machinery operations, 10 by electric shocks and two by acetylene cylinder explosions. Labor, War Invalids and Social Affairs (Molisa) Deputy Minister Nguyen Luong Trao says that these figures are even higher as many occupational accidents go unreported, particularly those in fisheries, construction and non-state sectors. He also observes that most accidents - especially those at construction sites, textile mills and mechanical factories - result from outdated equipment, lack of labor protection equipment and violations of labor safety rules.

Ho Chi Minh City trade union expert Nguyen Van Tan agrees, saying, "Many enterprises use outdated machinery and most of their workers do not go through any labor safety classes. It is easy to understand why many accidents happen. Many shops also try to cut costs by not providing workers with necessary equipment and labor safety knowledge," he notes. Trade unionists in fact say that in many workplaces employees do not have adequate or suitable protective equipment despite having to work in amid dust and toxic gases. They also have to endure high temperatures, noise and radiation levels that are often from 10 to hundreds of times higher than they should be. National Institute for Labor Protection inquiries have also revealed that around 80 percent of workers work in environments with at least two potentially harmful ingredients. The surveys at 8,000 private establishments found, for instance, that owners failed to hold regular inspection tours and neglected to provide staff with protective equipment. But most production facilities and machines there were also outdated and some equipment were not in compliance with quality control regulations. As a result, a large number of staff at some private enterprises suffered from ailments like deafness, lung problems and skin diseases.

Company owners, however, have tried to dodge the blame for the accidents by citing recent statistics from Molisa that show those caused by poor working conditions and unsafe equipment accounted for only 10.2 percent. In contrast, they note, accidents caused by workers violating regulations on technological safety accounted for 51.1 percent. But Tan notes that one factor worsening the situation has been precisely the growing tendency among some employers to hire low-skilled workers for short-term employment. According to Tan, employers resort to this tactic to save on labor costs. A worried Molisa has been sending inspection teams to "accident-prone" enterprises in the past few years. The effort has led to many violators being penalized, with some having their business licenses revoked. But it has nevertheless had negligible impact because, some observers say, the inspections were few and far between. Molisa insiders also say as much. One ministry personnel says, "We do not have enough staff to inspect all the businesses and most inspections occur only after accidents happen." At present, there are only 312 inspection officials, with each having up to 801 enterprises to monitor.

Recent reports also indicate that a large number of detected violations have gone unpunished. Of the 175 cases that caused several deaths here in Ho Chi Minh City, for instance, only two wound up in court. Molisa, though, has now required companies to set up labor protection councils to help monitor safety practice. "The probability of labor accidents would be very low if businesses set up their own labor protection councils," says Huynh Tan Dung, head of Ho Chi Minh City Labor Safety Inspection Board (LSIB). The LSIB also reports that about 75 percent of the state-run units have undergone labor safety courses and been instructed on the need to use protective equipment. These businesses have also spent more than 3,700 billion dong on installing new production facilities to improve working conditions and minimize the risk of work-related accidents. Meanwhile, observers say that the government should also rethink the country's compensation system for labor accident victims. They say the system has proved to be exceedingly slow, inefficient and unreasonably expensive. Two funds are available for compensation purposes - the labor users and social insurance funds - but delays in ironing out which is to be applied has meant a waste of time and money.

Complains Nguyen Viet Thang, who lost an arm while operating an automatic hammer: "I must wait nearly three years to received a monthly compensation of 100,000 dong." Under the country's labor laws, employers must pay 5 percent of total salaries to a social insurance scheme in order to provide assistance to workers in case of illness, childbirth, occupational diseases and accidents at work. The labor legislation also states that workers who lose 61-70 percent of their work capacity receive $10.28 per month, and $16.42 a month if 91 percent of work capacity is lost. But experts say that in reality, incapacitated workers receive a maximum amount that is equivalent to 30 months' salary. This is equivalent to between $857 and $1,071 - that is, if more than 81 percent of work capacity is lost. Experts say this figure is not enough to cover basic living costs for the rest of the worker's life.

By Tran Dinh Thanh Lam - Inter Press Service - June 1st, 2001.