Practice of using sout: how to prepare a list of jobs? How to correctly compile a list of jobs for certification

In 2014, workplace certification was replaced by a special assessment of working conditions (hereinafter referred to as “SOUT”), which significantly changed the approach to assessing working conditions at workplaces and to assigning guarantees and compensation based on its results.

For more than two years, a special assessment has been actively carried out in Russia, extensive law enforcement practice has been accumulated, and a significant number of court decisions have been made on a variety of issues. However, cases of gross violations of the law during special assessment activities are still very common. Many mistakes are made due to the fault of organizations conducting SOUT. At the same time, it should be noted that many omissions are made due to the fault of the employer and the commission for conducting the special assessment work. At the same time, the lion's share of them falls on the very beginning - preparation for the implementation of the SOUT.

The first thing that the commission for carrying out the special assessment must do is approve the list of workplaces at which the special assessment will be carried out, indicating similar workplaces.

In practice, the commission experiences significant difficulties at this stage, especially when calculating the number of jobs for positions with the same titles and several employees.

Based on Art. 209 Labor Code RF workplace- a place where the employee must be or where he needs to arrive in connection with his work and which is directly or indirectly under the control of the employer.

Thus, in order to carry out the calculation correctly, it is necessary to understand how many workers are simultaneously working at one workplace. If the organization employs 5 accountants, and the workplaces do not have shifts or rotational work (all 5 employees work at the same time), then the list of jobs within the SOUT should include 5 jobs for the position “Accountant”.

Let's consider another example: 4 guards work in the “every day after three” mode (4 workers replace each other - only one worker is at the workplace at a time). In this case, the SOUT may reflect only one workplace employing 4 people.

Mistakes are often made when including in the list of workplaces subject to SOUTH, places with the same name, where workers use the same equipment, work in the same work areas and premises, non-stationary workplaces, especially if at these workplaces Shift work mode is used. In these cases, the same principle applies - the number of jobs corresponds to the number of simultaneously working workers.

Let's consider an example: 6 turners work in 2 shifts on 3 machines in one workshop. Moreover, during the shift, each employee alternately works on all three machines. Here you need to record 3 jobs. However, in order to minimize costs, these jobs may be recognized as similar if they meet the necessary characteristics, which will be discussed below.

Sometimes, in order to simplify the preparation of the list of workplaces, members of the SOUT commission equate the number of pieces of equipment to the number of workplaces. In some cases this may be justified, but it will not be true, for example, when:

a) the use of several pieces of equipment by one employee;

b) the use of the same equipment by two or more simultaneously working employees.

Note that with workplaces with geographically varying work areas (i.e., non-stationary workplaces), the same approach is used. It is incorrect to automatically regard non-stationary workplaces with the same name as one workplace.

Having dealt with the number of jobs, we must not forget about the correct names of jobs. Instructions for filling out the report form on the conduct of special labor conditions, approved by Order of the Ministry of Labor of Russia dated January 24, 2014 No. 33n, require that the name of the position be indicated in the materials for a special assessment of working conditions in strict accordance with the organization’s staffing table. Often, the commission does not present the staffing table to the experts of the organization conducting the special assessment of work, guided by considerations trade secret, and gives to work a list that does not correspond to the “staff”. Subsequently, when applying the results of the special assessment system, assigning guarantees and compensations and inspections by regulatory authorities, it turns out that not all of the organization’s jobs have been assessed.

For example, in the framework of proceedings in cases No. 33-4199/2015 and A59-2617/2015, the judicial authorities come to the conclusion that the implementation of the special assessment and assessment process is incomplete due to the lack of assessment and assessment materials for some positions present in staffing table(Appeal ruling of the Astrakhan Regional Court dated December 7, 2015, Resolution of the Fifth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated December 14, 2015 No. 05AP-9269/2015).

To avoid mistakes, it is necessary to carefully monitor the compliance of job titles in the staffing table, employment contracts and SOUT materials.

Let's also look at another existing problem. In order to optimize business processes, many organizations carry out restructuring, which is inevitably accompanied by a change in job titles, sometimes completely insignificant. However, a change in position does not lead to a significant change in job responsibilities and working conditions. In this regard, many employers make an unreasonable decision not to conduct an unscheduled special labor assessment system, despite the fact that the job titles in the special labor assessment materials do not correspond to the new staffing table and employment contracts.

The discrepancy between the staffing table and materials of the SOUT, as well as the incorrect combination of jobs can be analyzed in the following example within the framework judicial trial in case No. A59-2617/2015. An organization engaged in fishing conducted a workplace certification for the “Watch Assistant Captain” workplace. At the same time, the staffing table included the positions of first, second and third watch mate. As part of the assessment of working conditions, it was decided that these workplaces were the same workplace. For proof this fact After completing the assessment procedure, the organization that conducted the certification of workplaces even issued a corresponding letter about this. However, the court did not side with the employer and the organization that assessed working conditions, pointing out that there were no materials assessing working conditions for the jobs of the first, second and third watch mate. In the motivational part court decision The Fifth Arbitration Court of Appeal pointed out that there is no legal basis for extending the results of certification to “positions that are in the staffing table with similar or identical job responsibilities", since such an opportunity is absent in the Procedures for certification of workplaces and SOUT.

Along with this there is another, more complex problem. In some organizations, changes occur so frequently that the staffing table is adjusted many times only during the SOUT. What to do in this case?

In our opinion, members of the commission for carrying out special environmental safety regulations, as well as labor protection engineers, are obliged to bring to the attention of the organization’s management the consequences of such reforms and the associated financial costs. Indeed, in these cases, in relation to newly introduced positions, it will inevitably be necessary, guided by Art. 17 of the Federal Law of December 28, 2013 No. 426-FZ “On special assessment of working conditions”, conduct an unscheduled special assessment within six months from the commissioning of new workplaces.

One way or another, a change in the staffing table in terms of the job title is the basis for conducting an unscheduled SOUT.

To generate a list of jobs within the framework of the SOUT in its final form, in addition to the names and number of jobs, it will be necessary to determine their compliance with the criteria of similarity. Allocation of workplaces to similar ones will reduce the costs of SOUT, since carrying out SOUT is mandatory only for 20% of total number similar workplaces (but not less than two) – the results obtained apply to all similar workplaces. For similar workplaces, one special assessment card of working conditions is filled out and a unified list of measures is developed to improve the working conditions and safety of workers.

Jobs that meet the criteria formulated in Art. are recognized as similar. 9 Federal Law No. 426-FZ:

a) having the same name;

b) located in one or more similar production premises (production areas);

c) equipped with the same (same type) ventilation, air conditioning, heating and lighting systems;

d) in which employees perform the same job functions in the same working hours;

e) on which the same type of technological process is carried out;

f) which use the same production equipment, tools and devices, materials and raw materials;

g) in which employees are provided with the same means personal protection.

However, please note that all of the above conditions are mandatory. It was previously noted that determining the similarity of workplaces is the task of the commission for conducting special assessments. At the same time, the correctness of allocating places to similar ones is determined by an expert from the organization conducting the SOUT. Thus, if during the implementation of the special assessment and assessment it is discovered that at least one workplace does not correspond to any of the characteristics identified by the Law, the assessment will have to be carried out at all workplaces previously recognized as similar (Article 16 of the Federal Law No. 426-FZ).

Summarizing the above, let us formulate several rules that must be adhered to in order to compile a correct list of jobs subject to SOUT:

1. Formation of a list of jobs based on the current staffing table.

2. Number of workplaces = number of employees simultaneously working at workplaces.

3. Jobs with different (including slightly different names) and similar or identical job responsibilities = different jobs.

4. Similar workplaces = workplaces that meet all the characteristics of similarity listed in Art. 9 Federal Law No. 426-FZ.

Each organization compiles a list of jobs, which is presented in the form of a table (Appendix No. 5 to the Methodological Recommendations).

The table indicates:

In column 1 - individual workplace number from 1 to 99,999,999.

Similar workplaces are designated by the workplace number with the addition of a capital letter “A”. For example, 125A (124A), i.e. workplace 125 is similar to workplace 124, and if there are several similar workplaces, then they will all be similar to workplace 124, which is inscribed in brackets.

In column 2 - the name of the workplace indicating in the genitive case the name of the profession of workers or positions of employees occupied at this workplace, in accordance with the staffing table and the All-Russian Classifier of professions of workers, positions of employees and tariff categories(hereinafter referred to as OK 016-94).

Lists of jobs are compiled by specialists from the HR department, labor protection department, and heads of structural divisions of the organization.

Important! The greatest difficulty in compiling this list is the correct classification of individual jobs into the category of similar ones in connection with taking into account the eight indicators set out below, which requires a significant amount of time from the performers.

Ignoring certain similarity criteria can lead to conflict situations between employees and the employer and, possibly, to repeated implementation of special assessments at workplaces and additional financial costs for the employer.

Performers of work on compiling a list of jobs indicating similar jobs are recommended to consistently evaluate the jobs in question for their possible similarity according to the following criteria:

1. Workplaces are located in one or more similar production premises (production areas).

2. Workplaces are equipped with the same (same type) ventilation, air conditioning, heating and lighting systems.

3. Employees work in the same profession, position, specialty.

4. Employees perform the same job functions.

5. Workplaces have the same working hours.

6. The same type of technological process is carried out at workplaces.

7. The same production equipment, tools, fixtures, materials and raw materials are used at workplaces.

8. At workplaces, workers are provided with the same personal protective equipment.

When similar workplaces are identified, SOUT is carried out at 20% of workplaces from the total number of such workplaces, but at least at two workplaces, and its results are applied to all similar workplaces (Article 16 No. 426-FZ).

Despite the apparent simplicity of identifying similar jobs, mistakes are often made when defining analogies.

Example 1. The company has 5 employees in the position of “sales manager”. They are all in the same office and perform the same job responsibilities. In this regard, the employer classified their workplaces as similar and planned to carry out SOUT for 20% of 5 workplaces, i.e. at one workplace.

The mistake in this situation is that the employer lost sight of the requirement of paragraph 1 of Article 16 of Federal Law No. 426 - SOUT is carried out at 20% of workplaces of the total number of such workplaces, but not less than two workplaces.

In a situation where the employer would have, for example, only 2 workplaces of “sales managers”, SOUT should be carried out at both workplaces. The minimum established by law (at least 2 workplaces) is aimed at obtaining objective assessment results during the research and, if at least one of the measured parameters at two workplaces differs, the SOUT will have to be carried out at all similar workplaces.

Example 2. In one office there are workstations for the chief accountant, leading accountant and HR specialist. Each of these workers has a personal computer (PC). The employer believes that the jobs of these specialists are similar: in the same office, with the same working conditions, and they perform work on a PC.

The mistake is that, despite the presence of identical equipment and the same working conditions, these workers have different positions. IN in this case jobs cannot be recognized as similar.

Accounting for the availability of equipment (in this case, a PC) will be carried out only if the employees have the same positions. In this case, the brand and year of manufacture of the PC must be identical.

Example 3. The organization has 5 drivers. One driver drives a UAZ vehicle manufactured in 2012, another driver drives a KamAZ vehicle manufactured in 2009, and the rest drive MAZ vehicles manufactured in 2013.

Often the commission defines all 5 workplaces as similar, saying that all cars have modern and comfortable cabins.

The mistake is that jobs are similar only on identical MAZ vehicles with the same year of manufacture, provided that the workers on these vehicles perform the same job functions with the same operating mode, etc. If different jobs are performed on cars of the same brand and the same year of manufacture (transportation of passengers, dangerous goods, timber removal, transportation of bulk materials by dump trucks, etc.), then in this case the jobs are not similar.

In this regard, SOUT should be carried out at workplaces in UAZ (1 workplace), KaMAZ (1 workplace) and MAZ (2 workplaces).

Example 4. There are 6 positions of “Heads of Departments” in the organization’s staffing table. The employer considers their workplaces to be similar and plans to conduct special assessments at two workplaces.

The mistake in this case is that all these “bosses” are the heads of not one department, but different ones: planning, the chief mechanic’s department, financial, supply and sales, and they perform different work. Therefore, SOUTH must be carried out at all these workplaces.

Example 5. In the department for the production of sterile and medicines

There are 14 line operators who are engaged in bottling medicines in a two-shift operating mode. The employer plans to conduct special labor safety measures at 3 workplaces.

The mistake is that the employer did not take into account the shift work of the operators. It is necessary to divide 14 staff units into 2 shifts and calculate an analogy from 7 jobs, provided that the remaining 7 people come to the same place, perform the same functions and the working conditions do not change. Only 2 workplaces will be subject to SOUT. general class working conditions may vary.

When compiling a list of jobs, it is necessary to take into account all jobs that fully comply with the characteristics of similarity. This will significantly reduce the costs of conducting SOUT, because one map will be drawn up for all these places. But this issue should be approached very carefully. Indeed, if it is revealed that the workplaces subject to inspection are not actually similar, then the procedure will have to be carried out for each workplace individually.

In addition, the list of workplaces subject to special safety standards must indicate the places where the necessary measurements and assessed factors will be carried out, the list of which is established on the basis of necessity and reasonableness. But in almost every workplace the following factors are assessed: , and . The list of other factors is compiled in accordance with occupational safety rules and sanitary standards. The quality and speed of the special assessment of working conditions largely depends on how correctly and carefully the list is compiled.

In 2014, workplace certification was replaced by a special assessment of working conditions (hereinafter referred to as SOUT) on the basis of the Federal Law “On Special Assessment of Working Conditions” dated December 28, 2013 No. 426-FZ-FZ (hereinafter referred to as Law No. 426-FZ), which significantly significantly changed the approach to assessing working conditions in the workplace and to providing guarantees and compensation based on its results.

For more than two years, a special assessment of working conditions has been actively carried out in Russia, extensive law enforcement practice has been accumulated, and a significant number of court decisions have been made on a variety of issues related to the conduct of special labor assessments. However, cases of gross violations of the law during special assessment activities are still very common. Many mistakes are made due to the fault of organizations conducting SOUT. At the same time, it should be noted that many omissions are made due to the fault of the employer and the commission for carrying out special assessment work. At the same time, the lion's share of them falls on the very beginning - preparation for the implementation of the SOUT.

Based on Article 209 of the Labor Code Russian Federation workplace - a place where an employee must be or where he needs to arrive in connection with his work and which is directly or indirectly under the control of the employer. Thus, to calculate the number of workplaces that are subject to special labor conditions, it is necessary to understand how many workers are simultaneously working in one workplace.

EXAMPLE 1

If the organization employs five accountants, and the workplaces do not have shifts or rotational work (all five employees work simultaneously), then the list of jobs within the framework of the special assessment and labor assessment must include five jobs for the position “Accountant”.

EXAMPLE 2

At the enterprise, four watchmen work in the “every day after three” mode (four workers replace each other, only one worker works at the workplace). In this case, when carrying out an SOUT, the list of workplaces at which the SOUT will be carried out (hereinafter referred to as the list) should reflect only one workplace where four people work. Errors are often made when including in the list places with the same name, where workers use the same equipment, work in the same work areas and premises, and non-stationary workplaces, especially if these workplaces use shift work. In these cases, the same principle applies - the number of jobs corresponds to the number of simultaneously working workers.

EXAMPLE 3

Six turners work in two shifts on three machines in one workshop. Moreover, during the shift, each employee alternately works on all three machines. In this case, it is necessary to record three workplaces. However, in order to minimize costs, these jobs can be considered similar if they meet the necessary characteristics, which will be discussed below.

Sometimes, to simplify the preparation of the list, members of the commission for carrying out special technical assessments equate the number of pieces of equipment to the number of jobs. In some cases this may be justified, but it will not be correct, for example, when:

• use of several pieces of equipment by one employee;
• use of the same equipment by two or more simultaneously working employees.

It is incorrect to automatically regard non-stationary workplaces with the same name as one workplace.

Having dealt with the number of jobs, we must not forget about the names of jobs in accordance with the law. Instructions for filling out the report form for a special assessment of working conditions, approved by order of the Ministry of Labor and social protection Russian Federation dated January 24, 2014 No. 33n, requires that the name of the position be indicated in the materials for a special assessment of working conditions in strict accordance with the organization’s staffing table. Often, the commission conducting the special assessment does not provide the experts with a staffing table, guided by considerations of commercial secrets, but provides a list that does not correspond to the staffing table. Subsequently, when applying the results of the special assessment system, providing guarantees and compensation, and inspections by regulatory authorities, it turns out that not all of the organization’s jobs have been assessed.

EXAMPLE 4

As part of the proceedings in cases No. 33-4199/2015 and No. A59-2617/2015), the judicial authorities came to the conclusion that the implementation of the special assessment and assessment process was incomplete due to the lack of assessment assessment materials for some positions present in the staffing table (appeal ruling of the Astrakhan Regional Court dated 7 December 2015 in case No. 33-4199/2015, decision of the Fifth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated December 14, 2015 in case No. 05AP-9269/2015).

To avoid mistakes, it is necessary to carefully check the correspondence of job titles in the staffing table, employment contracts and SOUT materials.

There is another problem when conducting SOUT. In order to optimize business processes, many organizations carry out restructuring, which is inevitably accompanied by changes in job titles, sometimes completely insignificant. However, a change in position does not lead to a significant change in job responsibilities and working conditions. In this regard, many employers make an unreasonable decision not to conduct an unscheduled special labor assessment system, despite the fact that the job titles in the special labor assessment materials do not correspond to the new staffing table and employment contracts.

What the discrepancy between the staffing table and SOUT materials leads to, as well as the incorrect combination of jobs can be considered in the following example in the framework of the trial in case No. A59-2617/2015 (decision of the Fifth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated December 14, 2015 in case No. A59-2617 /2015).

EXAMPLE 5

An organization engaged in fishing carried out certification of workplaces for working conditions in relation to the workplace “Watch Assistant” in accordance with legislative acts, valid at the time of certification. At the same time, the staffing table included the positions of first, second and third watch mate. As part of the certification, it was decided that these workplaces are the same workplace. This decision was formalized by the organization that carried out the certification of workplaces for working conditions, in the form of a letter drawn up after completion of the certification procedure. This letter was presented to the court by a fishing organization.

However, the court did not side with the employer and the organization that certified workplaces for working conditions, pointing out that there were no materials for certification of workplaces for working conditions (special assessment of working conditions) for the workplaces of the first, second and third watch mate. In the reasoning part of the court decision, the Fifth Arbitration Court of Appeal pointed out that there is no legal basis for extending the results of certification to “positions that are on the staffing table with similar or identical job responsibilities,” since neither the Procedure for certifying workplaces for working conditions, approved by order of the Ministry of Health and social development of the Russian Federation dated April 26, 2011 No. 342n (repealed on the basis of the order of the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of the Russian Federation dated February 20, 2014 No. 103n), nor the Methodology for conducting a special assessment of working conditions, approved by the order of the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of the Russian Federation dated 24 January 2014 No. 33n, do not provide for such a form of registration of certification results or special assessment of workplaces based on working conditions.

There is another, more complex problem. In some organizations, changes occur so frequently that the staffing table is adjusted many times only during the SOUT. What to do in this case?

In our opinion, members of the commission for carrying out special environmental safety regulations, as well as labor protection engineers, are obliged to bring to the attention of the organization’s management the consequences of such reforms, which will require new financial costs. Indeed, in these cases, in relation to newly organized workplaces, it will inevitably be necessary, guided by Article 17 of Law No. 426-FZ, to carry out an unscheduled special assessment within six months from the date of commissioning of new workplaces.

A change in the staffing table in terms of job title is the basis for conducting an unscheduled special operational assessment.

To compile the list in its final form, when carrying out the SOUT, in addition to the names and number of workplaces, it will be necessary to determine their compliance with the criteria of similarity. Allocation of workplaces to similar ones will reduce the costs of SOUT, since carrying out SOUT is mandatory only for 20% of the total number of similar workplaces (but not less than two), since the results obtained are applied to all similar workplaces. For similar workplaces, one special assessment card of working conditions is filled out and a unified list of measures is developed to improve the working conditions and safety of workers.

Jobs that meet the criteria formulated in Article 9 of Law No. 426-FZ are recognized as similar:

• workplaces are located in one or more similar production premises (production areas);
• the premises are equipped with the same (same type) ventilation, air conditioning, heating and lighting systems;
• at workplaces workers:

However, please note that all of the above conditions are mandatory. It was previously noted that determining the similarity of workplaces is the task of the commission for conducting special assessments. At the same time, the correctness of allocating places to similar ones is determined by an expert from the organization conducting the SOUT. If, during the conduct of the special assessment, at least one workplace is identified that does not meet the criteria of similarity established by Article 9 of Law No. 426-FZ, from among the workplaces previously recognized as similar, the special assessment is carried out at all workplaces previously recognized as similar (Article 16 Law No. 426-FZ).

Summarizing the above, let us formulate several rules that must be adhered to in order to compile a list of workplaces at which SOUT will be carried out:

1. The list is compiled on the basis of the current staffing table.

2. The number of workplaces for the purposes of carrying out special labor assessments must correspond to the number of workers simultaneously working at the workplace.

3. Workplaces with different (including slightly different names) and similar or identical job responsibilities are different workplaces.

4. Those jobs that meet all the characteristics of similarity listed in Article 9 of Law No. 426-FZ are recognized as similar.

The list of workplaces subject to a special assessment of working conditions (List, - ed.) is compiled and approved by the commission for implementation (SOUT - Special Assessment, - ed.) before the start of work. The document confirms the composition taking into account. In the List, specificity refers to individual categories of workplaces and the principle of similarity characteristic of workplaces located in one or several similar production areas, equipped with the same ventilation, heating and lighting systems:

Quote:'in which workers work in the same profession, position, specialty, perform the same labor functions in the same working hours while conducting the same type of technological process using production equipment, tools, devices, materials and raw materials and are provided with the same personal protective equipment (PPE) , - ed.)'

This is a direct excerpt from Federal Law No. 426-FZ of December 28, 2013, regulating the procedure for conducting special assessments. The assessment of such jobs is carried out according to the formula: 20% of such jobs from the total number, but not less than 2 places. The results obtained during the verification will be applied to all workplaces. If during the assessment a discrepancy is revealed in one of the indicators of similarity (for example, differences in the indicators of measured factors), all 100% of workplaces will be assessed.

List of jobs: steeplejacks, pilots, divers

Medical workers providing emergency medical care in an emergency or urgent form outside of medical organizations, trainers in sports competitions, workers in nuclear hazardous industries engaged in work with man-made sources of ionizing radiation, miners, firefighters, etc. - this is that separate group of jobs , carrying out individual species activities.

A special procedure for conducting a special assessment is being developed for them, which the Ministry of Labor must approve before January 1, 2015. During 2014, a special assessment for them will be carried out at general principles. There are no separate marks in the List for this category of jobs, so they will be registered as ordinary jobs, taking into account the analogy.

What jobs are subject to special assessment?

Despite the fact that the List is drawn up by a Commission, which should include representatives of the employer, an occupational safety specialist and a member trade union organization, in practice it turns out that the document is not always drawn up properly and the number of jobs subject to SOUT is not always correctly allocated. One of the main reasons is the lack of qualified personnel in the area of ​​labor protection in organizations. Another, ambiguous understanding of the requirements of Federal Law No. 426-FZ.

When independently determining the number of workplaces subject to assessment, the commission members believe that office workplaces are not subject to assessment. This is due to the approval of the previously existing assessment procedure - (ARM, - ed.), where certification was not mandatory for the workplaces of employees whose work was related to personal computers, copiers and other household and office equipment, provided that that the employee is working at a PC less than 50% of the time. Today this Order, like the automated workplace itself, have been cancelled, so these rules do not apply to special assessments.

In accordance with Federal law No. 426-FZ, all jobs are subject to special assessment ( including office staff positions), with the exception of workplaces of homeworkers, remote workers and workers who have entered into labor Relations With individuals, which are not individual entrepreneurs. It is a mistake to believe that, for example, a homeworker can be considered an employee who performs work at home, remotely, but at the same time the employment contract with him was drawn up on a general basis without taking into account working conditions. Employment contracts with homeworkers must take into account: the employer’s responsibilities to provide equipment, tools, and working conditions at home, terms and methods of payment wages, the employee’s responsibilities to provide results within the specified time frame. These conditions will be the basis for not conducting a special assessment.

Are places with traveling nature of work subject to SAW?

Workplaces with traveling character works or with territorially changing zones (at the automated workplace the concept “ ” was used - ed.) are no exception, therefore the assessment of working conditions on them is carried out in accordance with the specifics established in Article 16 of Federal Law No. 426-FZ:

Quote:‘by preliminary determination of typical technological operations characterized by the presence of the same harmful (hazardous) production factors, and subsequent assessment of the impact on workers of these factors when performing such work’

Examples of such places are the workplaces of drivers, sales representatives, loaders, real estate agents, plumbers, etc., who move around during the working day. different objects and not having a strictly defined working area.

Due to the fact that the List must also indicate the names of the factors and the time of exposure to the employee, in relation to places with geographically changing zones, the time of influence of the factors will be determined based on the employee’s service of the equipment and stay in different zones.

How to create a list of jobs?

The list as a document is drawn up according to the standards of the Ministry of Labor. The document form and filling procedure have been approved By Order of the Ministry of Labor No. 33n dated January 24, 2014.

The document contains the following information about the workplace: serial number, name of the workplace and sources of harmful (hazardous) factors, number of workers employed there, availability of similar workplaces, names of factors and time of their impact on the employee.

Quite often, difficulties when filling out the List yourself arise at the stage of filling out the name of the workplace. According to the rules, each position must correspond All-Russian classifier professions of workers, positions of employees and tariff categories (Classifier - ed.). The classifier was adopted in 1994 and all professions that existed at that time were included in it. Today, the world of professions is becoming much more diverse: HR managers, merchandisers, supervisors, business analysts and other concepts that came to us from the West have begun to appear on staff. What to do with them?

If under the automated workplace the names of positions had to be listed in accordance with the Classifier, then under the SOUT it is also allowed to include the names of positions in the List in accordance with the staffing table. Despite this, it is important to understand the problems that non-compliance with the Classifier may pose, especially for positions that are subject to guarantees and compensation.

Let's consider the example of the profession of “electrician” - a concept that is very often found in the staffing table, but few people take into account that it is colloquial. There is no name in the Classifier; instead, the concept “electrician for repair and maintenance of electrical equipment” is applicable to employees involved in the maintenance of electrical equipment. Due to such discrepancies, many workers are deprived of benefits for working during harmful conditions labor.