2017-05-25 (update): https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/352ab5e18513df32fddd13f0ccd7b0ea
Occupational health and safety management systems. Requirements with guidance for use
[…] Once the balloting period opens, on 19th May, you will be able to go on the draft review site to read and comment on the standard clause by clause. If you prefer to read it all in one go before commenting you can buy the draft today. […]
https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/889a26b727ebec532a7bc1dac105d0e9 (ISO/CD 45001:2014 Occupational health and safety management systems. Requirements with guidance for use – (Withdrawn Standard)) says:
Public Comments start date: 2017-05-26
Public Comments end date: 2017-09-27
(Previously, the public could get to the comment page vis https://drafts.bsigroup.com/Home/Category/13.100.)
See also: http://blog.psybel.de/stichwort/iso-45001-english/
It can take time to develop consensus standards and for the agreement to go through public review. For some users of standards, particularly those in fast-changing technology sectors, it may be more important to agree on a technical solution and publish it quickly before going through the checks and balances needed to become a British Standard. Therefore, BSI, CEN/CENELEC and ISO/IEC have developped a range of publications that are not formal standards, but allow publication earlier than if full consensus were to be achied. These publications are:
- Published document (PD)
- Private subscribed standard (PSS)
- International publicly availabe specification (ISO/PAS)
- European or international workshop adreements (CWA/IWA/ITA)
The PAS initially was marketed as “Product Approval Specification”. Later it was renamed to “Publicly Available Specification”. That probably made that pseudo standard more marketable. Originally, the PAS was meant to cope quickly with technoloy progress. However, it also became a tool to create pseudo standards for controversial processes where employers didn’t like the need to find a consensus e.g. with employee organizations. Examples: BS PAS 1010:2010 (Code of practice for managing workplace psychosocial risks and stress, Britain) and DIN SPEC 91020 (Occupational health management, Germany). As for “Published Documents” (PD), the PD 2511:2010 adressing Human Aspects of Business Continuity is a fine example for questionable contributions to the CSR show business.
By the way: In all cases you have to pay lots of money for obtaining these papers. That doesn’t really foster a good public discussion of these “public” documents.
Question to BSI:
=== ISO 45001 vs. OHSAS 18001 ===
In contrary to OHSAS 18001, in ISO 45001 there is no definition for “ill health” which puts “mental” and “physical” adverse conditions on a same level. Can employers in countries, where protecting mental health is not reqiuired by laws, claim, that ISO 45001 does not cover mental health issues anymore, as did OHSAS 18001?
May be (hopefully) I am wrong. TÜV SÜD says that there is an even stronger emphasis on mental health.
See also: “The need to prevent ill-health (including mental ill-health), as well as injuries” in https://committee.iso.org/files/live/sites/pc283/files/Documents/ISO%2045001%20Current%20status%20of%20development.ppt
2016-03: It’s in the latest draft. I hope that it also can be found in the fonal ISO 45001.