The incomprehensible position of some workers' representatives towards the protection of the health of those who work in ports

To avoid the recurrence of tangible disasters the various actors in the port world - institutions, employers and workers' representatives - agreed on adoption, each according to its competences and appurtenances, of all measures possible to prevent the recurrence of accidents. Workers too ports agreed on the need to allow carrying out work in port, in particular for employees operational tasks, only to those who have been submitted the minimum compulsory training to prevent the worker from may hurt or hurt other workers by doing their own homework.

It is surprising that a part of the port workers themselves, for the which is clear that measures must necessarily and dutifully be adopted to prevent possible misfortunes, do not have as much in mind the need to impose appropriate measures to counter a potential danger just as lethal as the one posed by an impalpable virus.

It is difficult to understand what are the motivations that induce many believe that a transparent danger is not a danger. It is difficult to understand why, for example, the Coordination of Port Workers of Trieste take sides not only against the obligation of the green pass to work in port, but also against the obligation, for carry out work activities, to show this certificate that from tomorrow it will be extended to all workplaces and whose adoption had been proposed by the European Commission to protect the security of EU citizens during the Covid-19.

To shed some light on the extremist position of some "no green pass" it may be useful to refer to a of the official voices of the protest: that of the Union of Trade Unions Basic (USB). On Monday, this union reiterated its position on the green pass specifying that «the USB believes that the vaccine is, at the state of the art, the most important and useful health tool to combat the pandemic from Sars - CoV-2, together with the use of masks, of the distancing and tracking'. A statement that by itself it could suggest that the USB, in accordance with the the union's position on how to deal with the dangers "materials" of the work in port, both as well in favour of introducing an obligation to vaccinate for counter "immaterial" dangers.

But then the USB mentioned its own "body to body with administration to achieve security protocols adapted to the emergency in progress, conducting a national campaign and international for total gratuity, reproducibility and the spread of vaccines by removing the constraint of patents that they must be public and not as a guarantee of the profit of the multinationals, considering it essential to vaccinate everyone throughout the world». On this, we agree: it is it is essential to vaccinate everyone around the world, as it is indispensable, to avoid new dramatic accidents in the ports of all over the world, implement all prevention measures and train obligatorily the port staff. This does not happen in everything the world.

But in Italy there is an obligation of training for port workers and no one protests, indeed to everyone it seems a an essential achievement for the safety of workers. Nobody strike, in short, because unsea trained workers are prevented from carrying out tasks in port and no protest because in other countries training is not compulsory or, indeed, it does not exist. No protest, it seems to us, because everyone - institutions, employers and workers - make themselves account that to avoid more deaths is necessary, indeed dutiful, apply good practices where it is already possible to do so. To us at inforMARE it would seem right to do the same to face a pitfall immaterial but equally potentially lethal.

Bruno Bellio