CC BY
8Получаемая степень доочистки сточных вод изучаемых нами локальных очистных сооружений, согласно нормативам, допускает использование очищенных сточных вод для орошения. [6,7].
Список литературы
1. Бренч А.А. Технологии переработки продукции животноводства. ч. II Переработка мяса и производство мясной продукции / А. А. Бренч, И. Е. Ветров, В. С. Дацук. - Минск: Наука, 2015. - 272 с.
2. Брындина. Л.В. Перспективное использование осадков сточных вод в экологическом земледелии /Л. В. Брындина, К. К. Полянский, О.В. Бакланова // Продовольственная безопасность: научное, кадровое и информационное обеспечение. - 2018.-С. 337-341.
3. Вихрева Д.Р. Санитарно-гигиеническая оценка использования сточных вод на орошение /Д. Р. Вихрева, Д. Д. Гамазина // Современный взгляд на будущее науки: сборник статей. -2015. -С. 214216.
4. Гарипова, Р.Ф. Практика устройства земледельческих полей орошения как способ утилизации хозяйственно-бытовых, промышленных стоков и проблема техногенного загрязнения / Р.Ф. Гари-пова // Политематический сетевой электронный научный журнал Кубанского государственного аграрного университета. - 2006.- № 23.- С. 206-219.
5. Иванченко О.Б. Токсические свойства сточных вод мясоперерабатывающего предприятия / О.Б. Иванченко, Р.Э. Хабибуллин // Известия ВУЗов. Пищевая технология. - 2006. - №2 4.- С. 114-116.
6. Методические рекомендации по расчету количества и качества принимаемых сточных вод и загрязняющих веществ в системы канализации населенных пунктов. МДК 3-01.2001, утв. приказом Госстроя России от 06.04.2001.- №75.
7. Скориков В.Т. Изучение использования сточных вод на орошение в условиях Йемена /В. Т. Скориков, А. В. Шуравилин, С. А. Койка, Е. А. Пи-вень // Агрохимический вестник. - 2012. -№ 2.- С. 38-40.
METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF LABOR PROTECTION AND
SAFETY MEASURES IN AGRICULTURE
Shirokov Yu.
doctor of technical Sciences, Professor, Russian State Agrarian University-Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy
Abstract
The article presents a methodology and a mathematical apparatus for evaluating the effectiveness of labor protection measures in agricultural production. Using the proposed approach to the economic assessment of potential damages and the economic effectiveness of occupational safety and health measures, it is possible to convincingly justify the appropriateness of these measures and defend the budgets of the program to improve working conditions to the owners of agricultural business.
Keywords: agriculture, economy, labor protection, efficiency, methodology.
Agriculture is an industry in which working conditions are among the least satisfactory of all sectors of the economy. The level of general injuries in agriculture is one of the highest among all types of economic activity and exceeds the average value in Russia by 1.51.7 times [1,9,10]. The health of agricultural workers is negatively affected not only by hard physical labor, but also by unfavorable microclimatic conditions, various chemical and biological substances, in a number of technological operations - directly poisons [6-8].
That is why agricultural workers are dissatisfied with working conditions and there are fewer and fewer people willing to work in this important industry and feed the country. But industrial injuries and occupational diseases also cause significant economic damage, reducing the technical and economic indicators of agricultural enterprises and minimizing the profitability of agribusiness. This situation cannot suit either employees or employers.
A new approach to the organization of labor protection of agricultural workers is needed, taking into account the economic efficiency of the planned measures [5]. At the same time, it is necessary to assess both the
potential economic damage from injuries and occupational diseases at the enterprise, and the economic effectiveness of measures to improve working conditions and safety.
To understand how big the problem is at a particular enterprise, it is necessary to compare the actual loss of working time at the enterprise (the number of days per 100 employees) with the estimated amount of losses under favorable working conditions, which is determined by the following formula [3]
D B.y.T. = (2.42 + 0,167B)100 , (1)
where B is the average age of employees at the enterprise, years.
If the actual loss of working time is greater than the estimated, then this is a clear sign of problems with working conditions at the enterprise and a signal to carry out a set of preventive measures.
Even minor deviations in the employee's well-being can lead to significant economic and social damage. The total amount of damage increases due to the increase in the cost of equipment, the increase in the qualifications of the worker and, accordingly, the increase in the value of working time. In crop production, the amount of damage increases with an increase in the
yield of agricultural crops, and in animal husbandry -with an increase in the productivity of animals.
Assessment of economic damage from occupational diseases and occupational injuries, accidents is a very difficult task. This complexity is due to the lack of primary information and detailed statistical reporting on the economic consequences of injuries and occupational diseases at most enterprises.
Methods for determining the damage caused to an enterprise and society by morbidity, injuries, labor turnover, etc., differ from each other in the completeness of accounting for losses: expenses of the enterprise and third-party organizations, as well as expenses from the social security fund.
In general, the damage to the enterprise where the accident occurred, an accident. it can be estimated by calculating and adding the following indicators (rubles>
* losses due to downtime of technological equipment in case of disability of personnel;
* loss of income by the enterprise due to a decrease in the volume of output;
* in case of an accident: expenses for the restoration and repair of equipment, vehicles, etc.;
* salary expenses for employees who took part in rescuing the victim and providing him with first aid, in eliminating the consequences of an accident or accident;
* expenses related to the involvement of experts, technical inspection, specialized laboratories, etc. in the investigation of an accident (accident^
* losses from a decrease in labor productivity after the victim returns to production;
* expenses related to the selection and additional training of a worker who should replace the victim;
* additional payment for overtime work related to the elimination of the accident and its consequences, as well as the replacement of the victim;
* payment of salary to the victim for the time that he did not finish on the day when the accident occurred;
* additional payment of the difference when transferring the victim to a temporary lower-paid job until the restoration of health or retirement;
* payment of severance pay to the victim when transferring him to disability or to the victim's family in the event of his death;
* payment of a one-time allowance to the victim or his family from the company's fund;
- expenses related to burial, payment of a one-time allowance to the family of the deceased, payment for the arrival of relatives at the funeral.
Adding all these indicators together, we will get the real amount of economic damage from an accident or an accident at the enterprise.
But we can prevent this damage by reducing the risk of accidents, accidents and illnesses by eliminating the problems identified during a special assessment of workplaces. Moreover, reducing potential risks with a rational approach to possible solutions to problems will allow you to get an economic effect and increase the profitability of the agricultural business.
The main sources of obtaining economic efficiency from measures to improve labor protection are the following:
- labor productivity growth due to:
- improvement of human performance as a result of fatigue caused by unfavorable working conditions, reduction or complete elimination of in-shift downtime, etc. This is especially important during the sowing and harvesting period, when any delay leads to crop losses.;
- reducing the labor intensity of products due to the reduction of unproductive labor costs caused by adverse conditions;
- increasing the effective working time fund as a result of reducing the loss of working time due to temporary disability due to injuries and illnesses associated with unfavorable working conditions;
- improving the efficiency of the use of tractors and combines, agricultural machinery and equipment.
Annual savings from reducing losses associated with unfavorable working conditions due to:
reducing the material consequences of accidents and morbidity caused by production;
cost savings on benefits and compensation for working in unfavorable working conditions;
reducing the damage caused by labor turnover caused by dissatisfaction with working conditions;
reduction of losses from defects (improvement of product quality) caused by unfavorable working conditions. The peculiarity of agriculture (crop production) also consists in the fact that delaying the deadlines for a number of basic operations (sowing, harvesting) significantly affect the reduction in yield or loss of the grown crop. Therefore, the loss of machine operators' working time during this period is especially harmful.
When determining the severity of labor after the implementation of measures to improve its conditions, all the changed elements (due to which the severity of labor has decreased), as well as all the remaining unfavorable elements that cannot be improved at present, are taken into account.
There is a close relationship between the integral assessment of the severity of work and the level of work capacity: the higher the integral assessment of the severity of work, the lower the level of working capacity falls and, accordingly, fatigue increases, and vice versa.
Therefore, knowing the indicator of the severity of labor (Tt), the value of working capacity (P) under these working conditions can be determined using a formula obtained empirically as a result of numerous studies [3]:
P=100-( IT-15,6)/0,64, (2)
where P is an indicator of working capacity under given working conditions, relative units;
It is an integral indicator of the severity of labor, formed under the same conditions, points; 15.6 and 0.64 are regression coefficients.
The possible increase in labor productivity due to increased efficiency is determined by the formula [3]
TT= (P2/P1-I) x 100 x K, (3)
where Tt— possible increase in labor productivity, %;
P1 and P2 - performance indicators before and after improvement of working conditions, relative units;
K is a coefficient that takes into account the possible increase in labor productivity as a result of an increase in working capacity.
The annual economic effect of the implementation of measures to improve conditions can be determined by the well-known formula: (4) Er=
Er - (Ez + Kvl x En), (4)
where Er is the economic result, rub.;
Ez is the annual operating costs for measures to improve working conditions, rub.
Kvl is capital investments aimed at measures to improve working conditions, rub.;
En = 0.08 is the standard coefficient of economic efficiency of capital investments in measures to improve working conditions.
The economic result (Er) is characterized by the prevented economic damage from accidents, injuries and occupational diseases, the economic effect of measures to improve hygienic, technical and social working conditions.
In addition to obtaining an economic effect from measures to improve working conditions and safety and reduce the risk of accidents, employers can count on additional economic benefits [2,4].
Recall that another state economic mechanism for stimulating employers to comply with labor protection requirements is currently the establishment of allowances and discounts to insurance tariffs for compulsory social insurance against industrial accidents and occupational diseases. In other words, the insurance premium is paid by the policyholder to the insurer based on the insurance tariff, taking into account the discount or surcharge established by the insurer. The maximum amount of the discount or surcharge can reach 40% of the insurance rate set by the policyholder. The amount of the discount and surcharge is calculated with the insurer according to the results of the policyholder's activities for the previous calendar year based on the following main indicators:
- the ratio of the amount of insurance security payments in connection with all insured events that occurred at the policyholder to the accrued amount of insurance premiums;
- the number of insured events that occurred at the policyholder, per thousand employees;
- the number of days of temporary disability of the policyholder for one insured event.
Discounts and surcharges to the policyholder are established by the insurer in cases where the above indicators are less (discount) or more (surcharge) of similar indicators for the industry (sub-sector), which corresponds to the main activity of the policyholder.
In addition, the employer should not forget about another source of increasing the economic efficiency of labor protection measures. This is a system for returning part of the contributions (up to 20%) to the Social Insurance Fund of the Russian Federation.
Using the above approach to the economic assessment of potential damages and the economic efficiency of the proposed measures for labor protection and safety, it is possible to convincingly justify the appropriateness of these measures and protect the budget of labor protection works before the owners of agricultural business.
References
1. Galyanov I.V., Koshechkin Yu.V. et al. Problems of ore protection in agriculture and directions of their solution. HURNAL Vestnik sel'skogo razvitiya i social'noj politiki. No.2.- 2016. Pp.33-41. (in Russian).
2. Ilmarinen J., Tuomi K. (2004). Past, present and future of work ability. In: Ilmarinen J., Lehtinen S. Past, present and future of work ability. Helsinki: Finnish Institute of Occupational Healthm. People and Work, Research Reports 65: 1-25.
3. Mustafina A.S. Economics of labor safety : an educational and methodological manual / A.S. Mustafina; Kemerovo Technological Institute of Food Industry. - Kemerovo.-2005. 72 p, (in Russian).
4. Oakman J., Neupane S., Proper K.I., Kinsman N., Clas-Hakan N. (2018).Workplace interventions to improve work ability: A systematic review and meta-analysis of their effectiveness. Scand J Work Environ Health.44(2): 134-46. DOI: 10.5271/sjweh.3685.
5. Shirokov Yu.A. ANALYSIS OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR MANAGING THE COST OF CROP PRODUCTION. Agrarnaya Rossiya. 2020. No. 2. Pp. 32-39. (in Russian).
6. Shirokov Yu.A. DECHEMIZATION OF CROP PRODUCTION DUE TO ORGANOSILICON COMPOUNDS. Agrarnaya Rossiya. 2008. No. 2. Pp. 33-36. (in Russian).
7. Shirokov Yu.A. TECHNOSPHERE SAFETY: ORGANIZATION, MANAGEMENT, RESPONSIBILITY. St. Petersburg, 2017. (in Russian).
8. Shirokov Yu.A. ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY AT THE ENTERPRISE. St Petersburg, 2017. (in Russian).
9. Shirokov Yu., Tikhnenko V., Ivakina E., Imam-zade A. LABOR SAFETY IN PIG FARMING WITH AN INCREASE IN THE RETIREMENT AG. The Scientific Heritage. 2021. No. 78-3 (78). Pp. 17-20.
10. Shirokov Yu., Tikhnenko V., Ivakina E., Imamzade A.I. RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS OF LABOR PROTECTION PROBLEMS OF TRAUTORIST- MACHINISTS IN AGRICULTURE. The Scientific Heritage. 2021. No. 70-1 (70). Pp. 6-9.
