Tribune. Less than a third of the 108,000 cases of mental illness attributable to work were recognized as occupational illnesses in 2019. This observation, which shows the extent of the phenomenon of suffering at work, also reveals that a significant proportion of health expenses linked to occupational risks were covered by the general health insurance scheme, and not by the work accidents-occupational diseases branch (AT-MP).
This estimate comes from the very serious commission chaired by a magistrate of the Court of Auditors, responsible for evaluating every three years the cost for the general system of the underreporting of occupational diseases.
The report of this commission dates from June 2021, but… it has not been made public. According to its figures, only 30,100 mental illnesses were covered by the AT-MP branch out of the 108,000: 28,500 for work accidents and 1,600 for occupational illnesses. This therefore means that 77,900 cases have escaped the compensation system for work-related health damage, funded by employers.
Fears and pressures
This phenomenon is not new. There has always been, in fact, a significant gap between the reality of work-related risks and their official recognition or compensation by the AT-MP insurance scheme. But, far from being reduced, this difference has steadily increased over the past decades. Thus, in its first report, in 1997, the commission responsible for estimating the shortfall for Medicare had estimated it at 888 million francs, or 135 million euros. Today, she estimates this cost between 1.2 and 2.1 billion euros.
Admittedly, since 1997, scientific knowledge has evolved, in particular making it possible to establish more causal relationships between occupational exposures and diseases. But from one report to another, we find the same findings on the causes of under-reporting.
Two-thirds of mental illnesses due to work are not recognized as occupational illnesses
This is the case with the lack of training and awareness of the medical profession on occupational pathologies. Or the reluctance of many occupational physicians to establish the initial medical certificate necessary for any victim wishing to make a declaration of occupational disease, for fear of seeing their relations with the companies concerned deteriorate. And this, despite their ethical and regulatory obligations in this area.
You have 60.67% of this article to read. The rest is for subscribers only.
–
