This analysis was first published by the Georgian Institute of Labour Studies (GILS), an initiative of the Public Health Institute of Georgia. Read the original on labour.edu.ge →
For public health, occupational safety is the most direct link between work and health: workplace injuries, deaths and occupational disease are largely preventable. This analysis examines why Georgia remains outside the ILO's two fundamental conventions on occupational safety and health.
- 1. Introduction
- 2. What the Conventions Require
- 3. Findings
- 3.1 Domestic reform has moved ahead of ratification
- 3.2 Workplace deaths remain a serious problem
- 3.3 The data gap
- 4. Discussion
- Argument: ratification locks in reform
- Argument: it completes the fundamental set
- Counter-argument: law matters more than ratification
- 5. Limitations
- 6. Conclusion
In 2022 the International Labour Conference made a safe and healthy working environment a fundamental principle and right at work, raising the ILO’s two framework conventions on occupational safety and health — No. 155 and No. 187 — to fundamental status. Georgia has ratified eight of the ten fundamental conventions; the two it has not ratified are precisely these. This analysis examines the gap, what Georgia has built domestically since 2018, and why ratification still matters.
Key Findings
- Georgia has ratified 19 ILO conventions (18 in force), including eight of the ten fundamental conventions, but has not ratified the ILO’s conventions on occupational safety and health, labour inspection or labour administration (EU Twinning Fiche, 2023; ILO, n.d.).
- Since 2022, the OSH conventions No. 155 (Occupational Safety and Health) and No. 187 (Promotional Framework for OSH) are fundamental conventions, alongside those on freedom of association, forced labour, child labour and discrimination.
- Georgia adopted a Law on Occupational Safety in March 2018, transposing the EU Framework Directive 89/391/EEC, and made it an organic law in 2019 (EU Twinning Fiche, 2023).
- The Labour Inspection Service recorded 35 workplace deaths and 330 injuries in 2022, all of the deaths among men (Georgia Today, 2023), and 32 deaths in 2025, 21 of them in construction (Parliament of Georgia, 2026).
- GTUC has called for ratification of ILO Conventions Nos. 81, 129, 155, 176 and 187 (GTUC, n.d.).
1. Introduction
For two decades the ILO’s eight fundamental conventions — on freedom of association, collective bargaining, forced labour, child labour, equal pay and non-discrimination — defined the core of international labour standards. Georgia ratified all of them. In June 2022 the International Labour Conference added a safe and healthy working environment to the ILO’s fundamental principles and rights at work, and designated Conventions No. 155 and No. 187 as fundamental (ILO, 2022).
This analysis asks why Georgia, which has substantially reformed its occupational safety law since 2018, has not ratified these conventions, and whether it matters. We argue that it does: ratification would anchor Georgia’s recent reforms in a binding international framework, require a national OSH system and programme with measurable targets, and subject progress to regular ILO supervision.
2. What the Conventions Require
| Convention | Core requirements | Ratified by Georgia |
|---|---|---|
| No. 155 — Occupational Safety and Health, 1981 | A coherent national OSH policy, developed and reviewed with employers and workers; duties of employers; rights of workers, including to remove themselves from imminent danger | No |
| No. 187 — Promotional Framework for OSH, 2006 | A national OSH policy, a national OSH system (laws, authorities, inspection, information, training, data), and a national OSH programme with targets and progress indicators, all developed through tripartite consultation | No |
Convention No. 187 also requires ratifying states to consider periodically, with employers and workers, ratifying further OSH conventions — creating a continuing process of improvement rather than a one-time commitment.
3. Findings
3.1 Domestic reform has moved ahead of ratification
Georgia’s occupational safety framework has changed substantially. A Law on Occupational Safety was adopted in March 2018, transposing the EU OSH Framework Directive; it was upgraded to an organic law in 2019 and amended in the 2020 labour reform (EU Twinning Fiche, 2023). The Labour Inspection Service has had a full mandate since 2021 and reported 7,111 inspections in 2025 (Parliament of Georgia, 2026). In some respects, Georgian law already reflects the content of the conventions it has not ratified.
3.2 Workplace deaths remain a serious problem
Construction is Georgia’s deadliest sector by total deaths: in 2025 it accounted for 21 of the 32 deaths recorded (Parliament of Georgia, 2026). In 2022 it recorded 35 deaths — all men — and 330 injuries, including 87 classified as serious (Georgia Today, 2023). The Service reported a 46% fall in fatal accidents in 2025 (Parliament of Georgia, 2026), but without a published series of rates per worker, trends are difficult to interpret.
3.3 The data gap
GTUC has noted that statistics on industrial accidents and occupational diseases are central to assessing safety at work, and that occupational diseases were not yet being recorded by the state (GTUC, n.d.). A national OSH system under Convention No. 187 must include data collection and analysis on occupational injuries and diseases. Ratification would make this a binding obligation, subject to international review.
4. Discussion
Argument: ratification locks in reform
Georgia’s labour history shows that protections can be removed as quickly as they are introduced: the labour inspectorate was abolished in 2006 and only fully restored in 2021. Domestic law can be amended by a single parliamentary majority. Ratified conventions create binding international obligations, regular reporting to the ILO’s supervisory bodies and public scrutiny. Ratifying Conventions 155 and 187 would make Georgia’s OSH reforms harder to reverse.
Argument: it completes the fundamental set
Georgia’s partners — particularly the EU, in the context of the Association Agreement and candidate status — increasingly refer to the ILO’s fundamental conventions as a benchmark. With OSH now among them, Georgia’s record on fundamental conventions is incomplete. Georgia has shown it can ratify new conventions: it ratified the Maritime Labour Convention in February 2024, becoming the 105th ILO member to do so (ILO, n.d.).
Counter-argument: law matters more than ratification
One could argue that what matters is domestic law and enforcement, and that Georgia’s 2018–2020 reforms already deliver most of what the conventions require. There is truth in this: ratification without implementation achieves little. But the reverse also holds. Implementation without a binding framework is fragile, and Convention No. 187’s requirement for a national programme with time-bound targets and indicators addresses exactly the weakness that current data reveal — the absence of a clear, measurable national plan.
5. Limitations
Workplace death and injury figures are available for only some years and are not published as rates per worker, which limits trend analysis. Under-reporting, particularly in informal work, is likely. This analysis has not assessed the government’s stated position on ratification, which is not publicly documented in the sources reviewed.
6. Conclusion
Georgia has rebuilt its occupational safety law and inspection system since 2018, but it has not ratified the two ILO conventions that now define the fundamental right to a safe and healthy working environment. Ratification would anchor recent reforms, require a national OSH programme with measurable targets and proper data, and complete Georgia’s record on the ILO’s fundamental conventions.
GILS Recommendations
- Ratify ILO Conventions No. 155 and No. 187, completing Georgia’s ratification of all ten fundamental conventions.
- Adopt a national OSH programme with time-bound targets and indicators, developed with employers and trade unions.
- Publish annual workplace injury and death statistics as rates per 100,000 workers, by sector, region and sex.
- Establish recording of occupational diseases as part of a national OSH information system.
- Consider ratification of Convention No. 81 on labour inspection, to anchor the Labour Inspection Service’s mandate internationally.
GILS Position
Every worker in Georgia has the right to come home safely. Georgia’s own laws now largely say so; ratifying the ILO’s fundamental OSH conventions would make that commitment binding, measurable and harder to reverse.
References
- EU Twinning Fiche (2023). Twinning project GE 21 NDICI SO 02 23 — Georgia: labour rights and occupational safety. esteri.it
- ILO (n.d.). Georgia — country portal. International Labour Organization. ilo.org
- ILO (2022). Resolution on the inclusion of a safe and healthy working environment in the ILO’s framework of fundamental principles and rights at work. International Labour Conference, 110th Session, Geneva.
- ILO (2006). Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187). Geneva.
- ILO (1981). Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155). Geneva.
- Georgia Today (2023). Statistics: 35 workers died and 330 were injured in the workplace in 2022. georgiatoday.ge
- GTUC (n.d.). April 28 — International Day of Dead and Injured at the Workplace. gtuc.ge
- Parliament of Georgia (2026). Economic Policy Committee heard report of the Head of the Labour Inspection Service. parliament.ge
Suggested citation: GILS Research Team (2026). Georgia and the ILO’s Fundamental Safety Conventions. Editor: G. Pkhakadze. Georgian Institute of Labour Studies, Tbilisi. labour.edu.ge
GILS analyses are prepared with AI-assisted drafting. All figures and claims are verified against the cited primary sources and reviewed under the responsibility of the Editor.
Was this article helpful?
Disclaimer. This article is health journalism intended for general information and education. It is not medical advice and is not a substitute for professional diagnosis or treatment. Always consult a qualified healthcare provider about your individual circumstances. Full disclaimer →
Related Coverage
Editorial standards. This article was produced under the GMJ News editorial process, with oversight by the GMJ Editorial Board. Our editorial process. Spotted an error? Contact the editorial team.
