Twenty years ago, the International Labour Organization (ILO) launched a new strategy, the Decent Work Agenda, to ensure human-oriented development in the globalization of working life and to provide an effective response to the challenges of globalization. We searched for and analysed the origin of the Decent Work concept and identified the key principles in ILO policy documents, survey reports, and relevant United Nations’ (UN) documents. We also analysed the implementation of the Decent Work Country Programmes (DWCPs) and examined the available external evaluation reports. Finally, we examined the objectives of the ILO Decent Work Agenda and the Decent Work targets in the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in view of occupational health. In two thirds of the ILO’s Member States, the Decent Work Agenda has been successfully introduced and so far fully or partly implemented in their DWCPs. The sustainability of the Decent Work approach was ensured through the UN 2030 Agenda, the ILO Global Commission Report on the Future of Work, and the ILO Centenary Declaration. However, objectives in line with the ILO Convention No. 161 on Occupational Health Services were not found in the DWCPs. Although successful in numerous aspects in terms of the achievement of the Decent Work objectives and the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the Decent Work Agenda and the Decent Work Country Programmes need further development and inclusion of the necessary strategies, objectives, and actions for occupational health services, particularly in view of the high burden of work-related diseases and, for example, the present global pandemic. In many countries, national capabilities for participation and implementation of Decent Work Country Programmes need strengthening.

The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), the International Labour Organization (ILO), the World Health Organization (WHO), the International Commission on Occupational Health (ICOH), and the European Union (EU) have encouraged countries to organize occupational health services (OHS) for all working people irrespective of the sector of economy, size of enterprise or mode of employment of the worker. The objective of this study was to survey the status of OHS in a sample of countries from all continents. A questionnaire focusing on the main aspects of OHS was developed on the basis of ILO Convention No. 161 and several other questionnaire surveys used in various target groups of OHS. The questionnaire was sent to 58 key informants: ICOH National Secretaries. A total of 49 National Secretaries responded (response rate 84.5%), from countries that employ 70% of the total world labour force. The majority of the respondent countries, 67%, had drawn up an OHS policy and implement it with the help of national occupational safety and health (OSH) authorities, institutes of occupational health or respective bodies, universities, and professional associations. Multidisciplinary expert OHS resources were available in the majority (82%) of countries, but varied widely in quantitative terms. The average OHS coverage of workers was 24.8%, with wide variation between countries. In over two thirds (69%) of the countries, the content of services was mixed, consisting of preventive and curative services, and in 29% preventive only. OHS financing was organized according to a mixed model among 63% and by employers only among 33% of the respondents. The majority of countries have drawn up policies, strategies and programmes for OHS. The infrastructures and institutional and human resources for the implementation of strategies, however, remain insufficient in the majority of countries (implementation gap). Qualitatively, the content and multidisciplinary nature of OHS corresponds to international guidance, but the coverage, comprehensiveness and content of services remain largely incomplete due to a lack of infrastructure and shortage of multiprofessional human resources (capacity gap). The estimated coverage of services in the study group was low; only a quarter of the total employed population (coverage gap).