Question 16576 — work

Summary

Mr. Gaëtan Dussausaye questions the Minister of Labor and Solidarity on the hierarchical recourse currently examined by the ministry following the refusal of approval by the DRIEETS of Île-de-France to the SSTETT association, a candidate for the creation of an occupational prevention and health service dedicated to the temporary work branch. This situation raises questions because of the links between SSTETT and the GST association, whose activities and methods of intervention are the subject of numerous criticisms. While GST is not among the approved prevention and occupational health services, this structure has developed significant activity with temporary employment companies and is already monitoring several tens of thousands of temporary employees. According to the elements made public, its model would be based very largely on the teleconsultation. As part of the examination of the file, it was noted in particular that only 123 visits were carried out in person out of more than 43,000 consultations. Furthermore, the weak territorial coverage of the system, with only 17 fixed medical centers throughout the national territory, fuels concerns about the effective access of employees to physical consultations when their state of health or their professional situation justifies it. Several occupational health players are also warning of the risk of a disconnect between medical monitoring and real knowledge of working conditions. However, occupational medicine cannot be limited to carrying out individual remote visits. It is also based on job observation, identification of professional risks and implementation of preventive actions. as close as possible to the field. These concerns are all the greater since the 2026-2030 Workplace Health Plan, recently presented by the Government, identifies temporary workers as a priority audience for prevention policy. He points out in particular that their fatal accident frequency index is almost twice as high as that observed for all employees. Temporary employees, often exposed to the most difficult tasks and the greatest professional risks, cannot be considered second-class employees. They must be able to benefit from particularly demanding occupational health monitoring and a real prevention policy. In this context, he asks what guarantees the Government intends to provide so that a structure that does not itself have the required approval cannot access indirectly to the occupational health market through a branch service. He also asks what guarantees will be required to provide temporary employees with medical monitoring in accordance with the requirements of the labor code, based on a real prevention policy and not solely on the massive use of teleconsultation.

Machine translation from French. The official text remains authoritative.

Timeline

No timeline events have been ingested for this record yet.

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

No documents linked.

Sponsors

No sponsors or actors listed by the source.

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.