Last year, SVT revealed how the municipalities' organization SKR made the Swedish Work Environment Authority tone down and back down in terms of the requirements for mouth protection in elderly care.
The Swedish Work Environment Authority's management has both openly and internally justified its actions by saying that it wanted to avoid a conflict with the Swedish Public Health Agency's recommendations that did not require oral protection.
But in a letter to the Corona Commission, the message is now completely different.
When asked if the Swedish Work Environment Authority set a higher level of protection than the Swedish Public Health Agency, the answer is “Yes, insofar as the Swedish Work Environment Authority made an assessment based on AML's (Work Environment Act) intention, that no employee should risk illness, illness or die through their work. ”
Questioned FHM
It describes how FHM was questioned several times, including when the requirement for mouth protection was removed at the request of the regions.
In addition, they highlight an opinion from their own expert, that only plastic visors do not provide sufficient protection.
This is the same statement that the management last year avoided including in the court process regarding the nursing home Serafen.
It is now stated that the agency “requested scientific evidence that wearing only a visor, is considered to be able to provide equivalent protection for workers' airways, such as wearing a mouth guard.
The Swedish Work Environment Authority has so far not taken part in such studies. "
May have violated the law
At one point, the criticism goes even further.
This concerns the over-representation of healthcare staff infected with covid, which according to the letter can be interpreted in several ways.
One interpretation is that risk assessments have been made at the workplaces that have been incorrect - but another interpretation is that the risk assessments have been made correctly but that the employer has not remedied the risks in a good way.
In that case, this would mean, according to the Swedish Work Environment Authority, “that the recommendations from the Swedish Public Health Agency, given in the spring of 2020, that oral protection was not needed in the care of patients or caregivers with suspected or established covid-19, have been contrary to AML, whose The purpose is to prevent ill health and accidents at work. "
SVT has offered both authorities to comment on the criticism, but both have refrained.
Javascript is disabled
Javascript must be turned on to play video
Read more about browser support
The browser is not supported
SVT does not support playback in your browser.
We therefore recommend that you switch to another browser.
Read more about browser support
Hear SVT's reporter Mikael Grill explain how the authorities handled the mouth protection issue.
Photo: Karin Fallenius / SVT / TT