Occupational Safety Framework Compliance · Directive 89/391/EEC
Your prevention obligations, measured site by site and turned into a costed action plan.
10 themes, a 5-level scale. And the action that moves each level to the next.
The framework’s 10 themes, already written from L1 to L5. One company, one business unit, or 300 at once.
Occupational Safety Framework Compliance · Directive 89/391/EEC
10 themes, 5-level scale.
Nordhavn Industries
53 / 100
They measure their maturity with Datamensio
An example
This could be your situation.
Take one company as an example: three sites, three spreadsheets, no shared answer.
Nobody can consolidate.
Nordhavn Industries, 2,400 people in Hamburg, Lyon and Porto. A client asks where the group stands. Each site answers in its own spreadsheet, with its own scales.
Three weeks, a single base.
One Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 (framework directive on occupational safety and health) assessment launched across all three sites at once, from the managers’ interview notes. The framework was already written, its 10 themes and levels L1 to L5 too.
Two costs avoided before being committed.
A score of 53 out of 100, with the gap concentrated on three themes. The AI companion spotted that two actions duplicated those of another audit. The committee report took one sentence to request.
What it saved them
- 3sites measured on the same base, instead of three questionnaires to reconcile
- 2duplicate actions caught before the spend
- 1committee report, with no manual rework
These figures are an example. They could be yours.
The standard imposes processes. Datamensio says where you stand.
01
The framework is already written
Themes, questions and levels L1 to L5, all written. You do not start from an empty spreadsheet.
02
The score lands the same day
Online, by self-assessment link or in interview. Theme by theme, comparable over time.
03
The gap becomes a costed plan
Every step up carries its action. The AI prioritises on expected effect, not on the order of the standard.
04
Progress can be demonstrated
Campaign after campaign, against your target and against your own past. That is what your board asks for.
The maturity scale
One level, the next, and the action that links the two.
This mechanism (a level, the level above, and the action that connects them) is what turns a finding into a trajectory.
Is the risk assessment updated whenever a working method, piece of equipment or work organisation changes?
- N1
No update is triggered by changes. The risk assessment document dates from its original drafting.
- N2
Updates take place during an annual review. Changes made during the year are only captured at that point, and inconsistently across work units.
- N3
Any change to equipment, process or organisation triggers a reassessment of the workstation concerned, with a dated report and a named owner.
- N4
Reassessment is built into the change management process: no commissioning is approved without an associated risk analysis, and operators at the workstation contribute to it.
- N5
Reassessments feed a periodic review of the method itself, benchmarked against accidents and near misses that occurred, with traceability of the adjustments made.
Action to move from L2 to L3
Link risk reassessment to the existing change management procedure: add a risk analysis section to the equipment or working method change request form, to be completed before commissioning with the name of the associated prevention officer, and check that it has been completed during the site’s monthly safety review.
« With Datamensio, we meet our objectives far more efficiently. The ERDF inspection services and our supervising ministry particularly appreciated an approach that gives them reliable data. »
Director, CCI 94CCI Île-de-France
« We believe this is the most suitable solution to scale our transformation project and measure impact according to our needs. »
Maja SucekChief Operating Officer, Interreg Danube
Rarely on its own
Frameworks combine. Put several together to cover your business, or have the AI write yours.
Take your first measurement
What this framework covers
Directive 89/391/EEC is the foundation of European occupational safety and health law. It requires the employer to ensure the safety and health of workers in every aspect related to work, underpinned by nine general principles of prevention: avoiding risks, evaluating those that cannot be avoided, combating risks at source, adapting work to the individual, replacing what is dangerous, and planning prevention. It also requires documented risk assessment, the appointment of workers responsible for protection, the organisation of first aid and evacuation, and the information, training and consultation of workers. Sector-specific directives, including 92/104/EEC for extractive industries, add detail without replacing it.
In mining and quarrying operations, practical application is the difficult part. Sites combine permanent co-activity, cascading subcontracting, isolated workstations, heavy mobile plant, blasting, work at height, explosive atmospheres, and exposure to silica dust. Three questions keep coming up: is the risk assessment document updated whenever a working method changes, or only at the annual review? Are external contractors genuinely integrated into coordination, or does a signed prevention plan suffice? When workers report a hazardous situation, do they see a decision, or just an acknowledgement of receipt?
A common confusion is worth clearing up: the framework directive is not something you get certified against, and no body issues an 89/391/EEC attestation. It is transposed into the national law of each member state, in France at articles L. 4121-1 et seq. of the labour code, and compliance is checked by the labour inspectorate and judged before a court. Having an ISO 45001 system in place is not the same as compliance: it organises safety and health management, but it does not guarantee that every legal obligation on the site is covered, nor that the risk assessment is up to date post by post.
A compliance audit ends with a binary finding: the obligation is met or it is not. The maturity assessment answers a different question: what level of control does the practice sit at, and what specific action moves it up to the next level. A site may have a formally complete risk assessment and no near-miss reporting culture whatsoever. The score by theme makes that gap visible, the gap against the target generates the action plan, and AI groups the actions into a prioritised roadmap, including across several sites at once.
The framework is ready to use and belongs to you. You can amend the themes, questions and maturity levels, or ask the AI to build a version tailored to your activity, quarry, underground mine, processing plant, based on your own risk assessment documents, prevention plans and safety instructions.
Reference standard: Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 (framework directive on occupational safety and health)
The themes assessed
General employer obligation and commitment
Formalisation of the prevention policy, ownership by site management, resources allocated, and the place of safety in operating objectives and the management chain.
Occupational risk assessment
Coverage of all workstations and work units, rating method, consideration of exposure to dust, noise, vibration and plant, and updating whenever a process changes.
Application of the general principles of prevention
Priority given to eliminating risk and to collective protection, justification for reliance on personal protective equipment, adaptation of workstations, substitution of hazardous products.
Organisation of protection and prevention services
Appointment of workers responsible for prevention, competencies and time allocated, use of external expertise, coordination with the occupational health service.
First aid, fire and evacuation
First aid and firefighting arrangements, trained first aiders, evacuation plans, management of isolated workstations and underground access, drills and lessons learned.
Information and training of workers
Safety induction on hiring, training at the workstation and on reassignment, accessible and understood instructions, and consideration of temporary workers and non-native speakers.
Consultation and participation of workers
Consultation of representatives on prevention measures, functioning of consultative bodies, handling of hazard reports, right to withdraw and protection of workers who exercise it.
Co-activity and external contractors
Prevention plans and protocols, coordination of simultaneous works, joint prior inspection, transmission of risk information to contractors, control of second-tier subcontractors.
Health surveillance and exposure monitoring
Individual monitoring adapted to workstation risks, traceability of exposure, redeployment and job retention measures, occupational health indicators.
Monitoring, incident analysis and improvement
Analysis of accidents and near misses down to root cause, follow-up on implementation of agreed actions, prevention indicators, periodic review of the system.
A short version of the framework is available for the online self-assessment.
Frequently asked questions
Can directive 89/391/EEC be certified against?
No. It is a European directive transposed into the national law of each member state, compliance with which is checked by the labour inspectorate and enforced by the courts. The assessment measures the maturity of your prevention system and prepares for inspections or an ISO 45001 audit, it does not issue any attestation.
What is the difference between this assessment and a regulatory compliance audit?
An audit checks whether an obligation is met and concludes with a gap or a pass. The assessment positions the practice on a maturity scale and shows the action that raises it a level. The two complement each other: the assessment prepares and prioritises, the audit confirms.
How long does it take to assess a site?
The short version can be completed in one working session with the site’s safety manager. The full version, run collaboratively, spans one to two weeks: most of the time goes into gathering information from operations, human resources and the occupational health service.
How does this framework relate to directive 92/104/EEC on extractive industries?
The framework directive sets out the general obligations, while 92/104/EEC adds requirements specific to surface and underground operations, including the safety and health document. An 89/391/EEC assessment forms the reusable baseline, and the cross-cutting roadmap allows both scopes to be combined without duplicating actions.
Can the framework be adapted to our activity?
Yes. The themes, questions and level wording can be amended, and the AI can build a version tailored to a quarry, an underground mine or a processing plant based on your documents. The framework remains under your control.
Can several sites be compared with each other?
Yes. The same framework applied across several business units produces comparable scores by theme, with benchmarking between sites and against previous rounds. Site action plans consolidate into a prioritised group roadmap.
Is legal expertise needed to answer?
No. The questions cover organisational and prevention practices observable on the ground, not the interpretation of legal texts. A safety manager or operations manager can answer them, and questions relating to human resources or occupational health are routed to the right contributor.
Where is the data hosted?
In France, at OVH, with backup at Scaleway. No transfer outside the European Union. The AI models used can be selected, including from European providers.