Abstract
BACKGROUND:
This research was conducted in the Brazilian granite mining sector. After epidemiological studies, it was established that professional pneumoconiosis is related to the inhalation of dust. Therefore, the Brazilian mining health and safety regulatory standard made it compulsory to provide humidification throughout the extraction and mineral treatment processes.
OBJECTIVE:
To develop the concept of systemic appropriation of the technological innovations that aim to protect the worker’s health. Until now, appropriation has usually been presented in its individual dimensions. In this article, the focus is placed on the collective and organizational aspects of this appropriation.
METHODS:
Two methodological approaches were used: interviews with the different individuals involved in order to report the history of the implementation of technical devices which meet the humidification norm; and ergonomic analysis of the work of the operators who used these devices.
RESULTS:
The appropriation of the technical devices occurred at two distinct levels: 1) Individual, related to the direct contact of the operator with the instrument; 2) Systemic, as the effects of the innovation propagated through the system affecting interdependent tasks, adaptation of the work organization and new production strategies.
CONCLUSIONS:
The implementation of prevention norms require innovations which are necessarily accompanied by transformations in the companies’ techniques, work and management.
Introduction
Work sustainability is one of the dimensions of sustainable development. The consideration of the relation between work and sustainable development leads us to reflect on work conditions that are dignified for all, do not produce deleterious effects to the population’s health and safety, and that also have long term sustainability without causing losses from one generation to another [1].
Initiatives to guarantee work sustainability frequently go through the creation of norms and regulations. However, the application of these norms triggers some questions. The first aspect is the realization that the norms imply in innovations, either technological or organizational, and that these are difficult to implement in real life situations. The analysis of work may offer some explanatory clues. The second aspect consists in the articulation between a generic dimension of the norms on the one hand, and the singularity of work situations on the other. How to promote this encounter? A third aspect leads us to take a position in terms of alternatives: the worker’s protection on the one hand versus considerations of work as a resource for sustainable development on the other.
We propose to treat these questions from a research performed in the Brazilian mining region of the State of Espírito Santo. After the introduction of a norm, which aimed at protecting the workers’ health, new types of equipment were introduced in the companies affected. Such step caused profound modifications in the workers’ way of working and in the equipment itself. In this context, a process of systemic appropriation, which will be characterized in this article, is developed.
The mining sector
The beginning of rock exploitation was an important milestone development for the municipalities in the Brazilian interior, notably in the State of Espírito Santo. Marble and granite extraction companies started their establishment in the seventies without many financial resources and in a quite rudimentary way. They appeared to substitute agricultural activities focused on coffee cultivation, which no longer offered good subsistence levels. The entrepreneurs knew little about rock extraction and the workers did not have any experience either. The public authorities at the time did not have supporting legislation and the development of the region happened by a process of learning-by-doing and learning-by-using, but at the cost of workers’ mutilations and deaths [2]. The Brazilian Social Security Technology and Information Company (DATAPREV) registered 4,740 typical accidents in 2007, of which 54% occurred in the south-eastern region, where this research was carried out.
From the broad spectrum of illnesses related to mining work, the respiratory ones such as pneumoconiosis deserve attention in our population, not only for their great prevalence, but also due to the potential seriousness of the patients’ conditions, given the irreversible and incurable characteristic of these diseases. This represents a serious public health problem [3]. The estimates (based solely on projections of formal occupation) reveal an approximate number of 6,000,000 workers potentially exposed, an increase from 1,525,182 in 1985 and 2,065,935 in 2001 [4].
Therefore, the development of the Brazilian mining sector was associated with numerous and significant work accidents until a decision was taken to prepare a regulatory framework in order to control this deleterious situation.
In 1978, after the Geneva Convention on health and safety in the workplace, the first decree was created by the Ministry of Labour and Employment (MTE) establishing a Regulatory Norm for Mining Occupational Health and Safety (NR22). The norm of interest for this research is the one that deals with the control of dust generation at the workstations and in the circulatory system due to the risk of silicosis and respiratory diseases. This norm demands that in granite quarrying and processing there should be humidification so that water spray can cause the clustering of dust into irrespirable particles. In this way, pneumoconiosis among workers and in the neighbouring communities exposed to silicon dust can be prevented.
Although NR22 was published in 1978, it can be said that it was only after 2007 that humidification systems began to be used. What can explain then this 29-year delay?
These standardizations and regulations were, undoubtedly, an important milestone in the history of mining as a whole and bring contributions to safety as well as to the extraction of ornamental rocks. However, until today the companies have difficulties in adapting to these norms at both the technical and management levels [5]. These situations indicate the difficulties for the companies and operators to incorporate the norms, as well as the technical and management requirements that they impose.
The norms are unable to predict everything and it is not their role to consider precisely the strategies which the operators use to implement prevention. Likewise, production strategies and industrial challenges were not considered at the time when the norm was elaborated. Prevention, therefore, cannot be reduced to simply following norms.
The technical requirements necessary for the compliance with the health norms may have negative consequences and effects when implemented [6], but these effects have the potential to reveal what may have been neglected and should have been considered in the work system.
The operators do not remain passive in the light of these disturbances to the work system. They try to find solutions to give continuity to production, either by rejecting the innovation when it is in strong disagreement with the system (targets, objectives, materials, work process, space, production time, product quality, comfort), or by integrating the new device, which presupposes an appropriation process that allows reflection on the work at the moment of introduction of a technical novelty.
The appropriation of a technical object by the workers is related to different dimensions. In order to be efficient, the implementation of a technical novelty should find anchoring points in a favourable social, cognitive and cultural environment. This environment will set this object in movement, often transforming it and adapting it to the necessities of each situation [7].
Appropriation also occurs at a level other than the direct contact between the operator and the artefact. It also occurs at a systemic level, at the level of re-composition of several elements which will condition this appropriation, such as economic impacts, new risks, development of new abilities, innovation by suppliers and equipment makers, among others.
Appropriation
Appropriation can be defined as a process during which a new artefact, a new device or a new procedure find previous norms in the “professional worlds” already constituted [8] with their practical dimensions or ways of doing things, conceptual dimensions or ways of thinking, and sometimes values pre-existing the introduction of the novelty, but which this novelty will set in motion. Well, we know that in the light of these deconstruction/reconstruction processes, the user is not passive. S/he absorbs some learning that leads him/her either to modify his/her ways of doing and thinking, or to act on the technical resources at his/her disposal, in accordance with the notion of constructive activity [9].
Many important studies concerning the design-in-use and users activities were carried out in order to research and demonstrate the importance of considering appropriation as a stage of the production process, mainly to guarantee the success of the innovation [10–13].
In synthesis, the main contributions of the appropriation approach are: Appropriation covers several possible facets: on the one hand, the evolution of the ways of doing and thinking mobilized by the workers in contact with the new technique; on the other, the evolution and differentiation of the artefact introduced [14–16]; Appropriation occurs when an artefact achieves such an inscription in the user’s body that the gestures during use become transparent (automatic) to the user [17]; For effective appropriation, the artefact must gain meaning and symbolic inscription in the whole user community [18, 19]; Over time, professional genesis concerning the development of certain instruments (composed by the artefact and the components related to the action) can be developed, as well as competencies and conceptualizations [20].
Through these theories, it is possible to understand how the individual appropriation occurs, that is, by the operator in view of the instrument. For the research currents that study the conception of new work tools, new equipment and new production systems, these theories help with the comprehension of how the instrument is used by the operator. However, in order to think of appropriation for prevention, it is necessary to go further.
Individual appropriation exists, but it is not enough to explain the introduction of technical devices in the production processes of the different companies of an industrial sector. It is necessary to situate oneself at another more global level of analysis for which the systemic appropriation, less related to the individual activity and more with the work system as a whole, was developed. This concept has as focus a collective dimension of appropriation [21]. It is a process of propagation, adjustment, transformation and re-composition of the work system (a hybrid system which has workers as well as tools, processes and production strategies).
Work system concept
The concept of systemic approach or system thinking was developed by a number of authors of several areas of knowledge such as administration, psychology and education, and also in the field of worker’s health [22–26]. For all these authors, what is fundamental in the system idea is the dynamic relationship between the several interlinked and interdependent elements of which it is made. In this respect, it differs from the traditional scientific methodology based on analytical reduction, which studies parts of the system in isolation as if their functioning did not depend on other elements.
The fundamental concepts of the system are: interaction (non linear causality, such as the effect of the beating wings of a butterfly in Brazil generating a hurricane in another part of the world) [27]; totality or globality (a set of non-divisible elements, the whole is more than the sum of the parts); system organization (behind an apparent disorder there is a more complex order than the one visible).
The first function of a system is its own conservation: stability and constant state. One of the characteristics that function is that the elements of the system are all in a state of potential disequilibrium inasmuch as it does not stop exchanging energy with its environment.
In the companies studied, when we analysed the appropriation process that the system needed to undertake with the introduction of humidification, the existing interdependencies among the elements of the system became evident. It is the appropriation and the integrated dimensions that reveal the dimensions of the system in question.
Methodology
This study was carried out in six granite mining and processing companies located in the State of Espírito Santo (ES), the main producer of this raw material, where there was implementation of dust control through humidification.
In order to understand how an already completed process of implementation of technical devices occurred, we chose to associate two research methodologies undertaken at two distinct moments: (i) interviews with government agents responsible for inspection and representatives of company and trade unions for the reconstitution of the history of the implementation of the devices designed for implementing humidification; and (ii) ergonomic work analysis – EWA of the operators who used these devices at the time of the research.
Thus, in the first moment, in order to understand how the work systems were being organized over time after the introduction of humidification, and to recover in detail the changes occurred and how they provoked new risks, interviews were held with workers, managers, prevention technicians and company proprietors. The data obtained permitted the construction of the chronological analysis of the implementation of humidification and identification of aspects of the organizational system related to the introduction of technical humidification devices, such as: who the workers involved were, what each one’s individual point of view was, what model they used to treat the questions that emerged and what resources they possessed.
In the second moment, according to the methodology of Ergonomic Work Analysis (EWA) [28], systematic observation of the main activities which were altered with the humidification took place: perforation with hydraulic and pneumatic equipment, wedge hammerers, lift-truck workers, operator of diamond wire saws in the extraction units, operator of multi-wire machines, loom operators, workers who use pneumatic grinders and polishers in the processing units. These observations permitted greater proximity with real work situations, knowledge of the habitual operational techniques and how the operators dealt with the variations.
This method allowed for the understanding of the complexity of the extraction work and of processing granite in the mines that were visited, and also for the identification of the individual and collective dynamics which determine and condition the work situations, including the management project undertaken by the companies and the role of the prevention agents.
Auto-confrontation techniques [29], a stage of EWA methodology, were carried out since the beginning of the research, both individually and/or in group (8 groups of 3 to 15 people) for a better explanation and comprehension of what was observed of the real work situations in the visited companies. Video recordings with workers going about their activities and daily field notes were brought to the auto-confrontation meetings. These moments were used to discuss the appropriations around humidification and to clarify the researcher’s doubts.
Results
Two examples of appropriation are presented as follows: one individual, resulting from research data obtained in the granite processing sector; and the other systemic, collected in the granite extraction sector.
Appropriation at the individual level
The workers of the processing companies faced the first important difficulty imposed by the introduction of humidification in the work processes: the difficulty in visualizing the cut outline, which faded away in contact with water and mud. To solve this problem, they carried out simulations varying the quantity of water from the beginning of the cutting process, so that mud did not remain on the rock piece. This solution improved the work process considerably, although it introduced two other new problems: the risk of receiving retro-injected water in their eyes and of having the water remove the cut outline. In order to circumvent these problems, they started to use a stiletto so that the cut outline could be perceived when passing their fingers over it. Over time, they used less and less their sense of sight and started to use their sense of touch. At a given moment, they did not even use touch anymore, since they had already memorized the outline without having to refer to it all the time.
Another risk introduced with humidification was the risk of electric shock. So, the workers started rolling pieces of rubber around the cutting tools, but this protective measure prevented the machine’s cooling flow. If they removed the rubber, water would enter the machine motor, very often with mud (from the granite dust), and this dirt also caused wear and tear to the motor, in addition to electric shocks. The workers then assumed body postures to avoid getting wet and to avoid getting hit by the water sprayed out by the motor blower. To avoid electric shocks, for example, first they would seek a good position in relation to the rock piece to better grip it and visualize the outline; after the introduction of humidification, they positioned themselves in relation to the wind and the tool, keeping distance from the water spray.
Another important difficulty was the handling of the new pneumatic tool which, being lighter and driven by compressed air and no longer by electricity, demanded a whole new set of gestures by the workers.
EWA permitted to get to know and discuss the gestures performed by the workers to appropriate the new tool. It also allowed for the observation of the workers’ operative modes in dealing with the difficulties brought about by the introduction of humidification. Auto-confrontation in group enabled the workers to share their ideas and alternatives to face the problems. The workers adapted to the machine and learnt new gestures and operational methods, but were unable to do anything against production delay.
As an example, the main problem with humidification is related to the drill rods getting stuck in the holes, making it impossible the placing of explosives. The workers started discussing among themselves in search of a solution. Some preferred to make a complete drilling in each hole, which means they drilled and changed the rods every 0.80 m up to the demanded depth, which might be 10 m, 20 m, 40 m or 60 m, according to the verbal orders received. But this meant an important physical effort because, removing the rods at every 0.80 m results in lifting the 28 kg of the hammer. At the end of the 60 m, the worker will have lifted 28 kg 75 times. Other workers preferred to make a sequence of five holes, leaving the rods inside them and increasing the depth at each passage, thus avoiding the physical cost, but running the risk of getting the rod stuck in the mud. Then, it would be necessary to remove the mud from inside the holes. A more experienced worker defended the use of the technique of injecting compressed air into the holes, commonly used to remove gunpowder waste of “failed fire”, as a solution to remove the mud. Such alternative was widely accepted by the workers, who started to inject compressed air at each 0.80 m drilling, which led to good results in terms of saving materials and tools, in addition to recovering productivity.
Systemic appropriation
In 2005, one of the extraction companies studied the possibilities to eliminate the dust and implemented an exhaust (Fig. 1) adapted to a pneumatic hammer and to a hydraulic drill, with the objective of aspirating the dust into a hose where the humidification of the dust occurred, making it thicker and non-respiratory.
pneumatic hammer with the exhaust adaptation for dust control.
The introduction of the exhaust, however, brought a number of problems (Fig. 2): dust remained in the surroundings after the dry out; difficulty in the identification of the compressed air hose connected to each equipment; obstruction in the visualization of the drilling plumb; water entering the holes; drill rods stuck in the holes; loss of material and time; physical and psychological fatigue of the workers who began to disobey the norm, and finally refusal of the use of this technique by the inspection organ.
Graphic representation of the system after the introduction of the humidification process in 2005.
The important aspect to be pointed out here is how much the problems that arose with attempts to implant the technical innovation reveal about the system. The implementation of the exhaust brought new demands and fatiguing to the workers: increase in the strength required to remove the drill rod, work organization with the need of one more operator to remove the rods that got stuck, and increase in production time. Finally, after inspection, this technique was prohibited. It was verified that the exhaust was not enough to eliminate the dust, and besides, the dust could be easily removed by the workers, who restarted carrying out the operation in the dry. The other non-compliances with the system were not pointed out by the inspection organ.
In 2007, the protective cover was abandoned and the work was performed by using a pneumatic hammer with two needles (one with water and one with compressed air). New non-compliances with the system emerged (Fig. 3).
Graphic representation after the introduction of the humidification process in 2007.
With the adaptation of the two needles in the hammer, material losses continued to occur and rods continued to get stuck, increasing production time. To deal with this disorder, it was necessary to once more reorganize the work teams. The discomfort continued because of the environment soaked by the water spray and because of the fatigue in recovering stuck rods. What was observed was the propagation of problems to a number of workers other than those who worked using the new technical device. Those who had interdependent activities and had their work modes changed were also affected. Likewise, the wedge hammerers had to take on a new task: to remove the excess mud left by the pneumatic drill, a task that proved to be to be quite exerting, demanding uncomfortable postures and repetitive movements, as shown in Fig. 4.
Worker in a position of discomfort Pneumatic hammer removing excess mud from the hole.
The adaptation alternative using two needles was well accepted by the inspection organs, but when the company calculated the losses with waste of material and in production time, it decided to revise the device project and requested a new adaptation, this time with the insertion of a sole water needle and the use of water under pressure. Then, in 2008, a new alteration to the tool was made, and this time the whole system adapted itself (Fig. 5).
Graphic representation of the system after the introduction of the humidification process in 2008.
After this new adaptation using just one needle with water under pressure, either with a compressor or a high water tank, it can be said that the systemic appropriation occurred. The previous production time was recovered, new modus operandi was developed for interdependent tasks, as well as new collective work methods. This alteration of the work tool in the system was well accepted by the inspection organ, company safety technicians, workers and the production management.
As problems spread and the workers get adapted, the whole system begins to adjust and reconfigure, with change in people’s management and in production time, hence in the productive activities and in the industrial strategy.
When the alternatives found by the workers were not enough to solve the problems or disorders, the production organization needed to be altered. This means that, even if the operator had adapted well to the new technical object, it was not enough to keep the system’s complete coherence and to put it back in order, fulfilling its objectives of production and health. The introduction of the new artefact disturbed the system in a diffuse way, and it was in this way that this system could be recomposed.
In the reported cases, it can be noticed that the appropriation happened as a result of: instrumental genesis; physical assimilation at the level of gestures and postures; assimilation at a cognitive level, notably in the action plans; and also at the affective level through anger when facing difficulties, frustration at the disruptions and satisfaction when a good solution was finally found. Over time, a symbolic and cultural inscription was created in the collective heart where the introduction of humidification occurred. However, success came about thanks to the appropriation the system made of the innovation by altering interdependent tasks, production time, material, security, work fronts, etc.
Individuals develop activities with a constructive purpose: the preparation of their instruments (in their psychological and material component parts) and more widely the resources (competencies, conceptualizations, representation . . . ) and the conditions of their productive activity.
Above all, appropriation is described in literature as an individual process [14–19]. Even for the authors who seek to develop a socio-cognitive approach, appropriation gives a notion that refers back to the individual level. This approach is incomplete and does not adequately interpret the systemic process presented here.
As regards to the systemic appropriation, in the extraction units the impacts took on several forms and also resulted from the insertion of an innovation. To put the humidification system into practice, it was necessary to implement civil engineering projects to assure water capture, storage and pumping. Afterwards, the adaptation of the existing hammers was decided. It was then perceived that humidification implied not only in injecting water, but also in evacuation or aspiration, something that had not been thought of previously. At each new concept process, it was as if they were always starting from the beginning, without any learning. These attempts were accompanied by consecutive losses of material and productivity and, actually, it was the workers who found the means for its functioning, in an appropriation process.
After a new alteration to the tool, the whole system adapted and reconfigured, the previous production time was recovered, interdependent tasks were also re-adapted by developing new operating modes, and the new way of working in teams was maintained. This alteration to the tool and system was well accepted by the inspection organ, by company safety technicians, workers and the production management.
It can be noticed that the success of some innovation cannot be based just on its appropriation by the worker. It is necessary to have a good artefact, but also adaptations to the system, such as the adaptations of their production objectives that consider production time which, in this case, had to be altered. This is the essence of systemic appropriation. A small equipment alteration and the introduction of a little water in the environment had the effect of propagating problems, like a drop of water in a lake that provokes the propagation of waves, with the difference that the wave of effects comes back over the activity.
But the individual appropriation (situated and located in the heart of a collective of workers) is also considered by other workers of the network, which can lead to the evolution of their own activities. Therefore, the concept of systemic appropriation also aims at focusing on the collective dimension of appropriation. Several elements of the system, such as the cost of material, competing activities and consequential ones (work of tractor drivers and wedge hammerers), the quality objectives, the form of work (individual, in couples or in a team) have to be modified. That is, all the system undergoes an appropriation process of technical innovation. From the point of view of systemic appropriation, the dynamics of appropriation then appears as a process of propagation in the heart of a work system, made up of a network of interdependent workers. The system is distinct from the objectives fixed by the company, which does not mean that they should not be considered, made available or revealed by the workers, who still have other objectives.
Thus, what is important is that there is a process of propagation, adjustments, recomposition, transition and development through which the work system transforms itself. It does not function otherwise.
It is necessary to make the dynamics of this systemic appropriation clear concerning the relationship between humans: there is some interdependence between workers and elements. Thus, there is a dynamic that is inter-individual and one that is individual. The actors should be aware of the elements affected by the innovation (inter-individual dynamic) and adjust things to the level of their own activities, either at the operational or management level (individual dynamic). The identification and analysis of the elements is not enough to understand the totality: it is necessary to study the relationships.
The examination of the several projects of the companies researched, that is, the adaptations of existing artefacts or the creation of new ones, reveals that the conception, at first, had been be solely focused on the technical dimension, directed at the adjustment of the existing equipment. Then it focused on the search for new equipment, without ever integrating the work and the work system in all its dimensions, or still reducing it to an impoverished format: drilling is certainly making a hole, but it is also drilling in the correct way, following a plumb line, taking in visual information, coordinating with the team and preparing the space; polishing is removing raw material, but it is also observing and assuring quality during the execution of the activity, counting on the tool pressure power to work, etc.
These projects gave little consideration to the workers as individuals dealing with an environment in change, complex and inscribed in a historic context, in a culture and a society in movement, as if the work environment (in the wide sense of the term) in which they were inscribed could be immutable, immobile, inert, acculturated and thus, negligible.
The introduction of water brought an effect of propagation and diffusion of problems and difficulties, demanding the whole system to go through adaptation. The environment was modified in multiple dimensions (management indicators, work organization, production, mental and physical work load, . . . ) and not only in terms of the “work positions in question”.
We have to consider that these projects were imposed by a regulatory norm without anticipating the dynamics of the implied changes, in an almost instantaneous way, from outside the work environment, supposedly requiring just the practical application of the workers. Furthermore, at the macro level (of the norm), the work and the technique had been forgotten, but at the meso level (of the companies), the technique became omnipresent in relation to the work, which was indeed submitted to the real test, relinking all the dimensions evoked previously, without avoiding the arising of new risks: to health, safety, production, quality and performance.
The revealing potential of the disorders onto the system can and should be used in the project. We are no longer speaking of conception for the use the operator will make of it, but the use by the system, that is, how the whole system will be affected and will need to be transformed so that the innovation can function in all its potential.
Prevention is systemic, not created just by the human factor. It is thus necessary to reflect on appropriation through a systemic approach, mainly when dealing with an innovative prevention device and especially when it comes to fulfil a norm.
Conclusion
This research leads us to conclude that it is necessary to design for appropriation. The choices of a design for appropriation require the articulation of criteria based on protection and prevention: social and cultural acceptability, individual and collective support and also efficiency [30]. The debate regarding appropriation is important inasmuch as it reinstates as central the attention to questions such as the human and social use of the innovation [31, 32].
During the introduction of the humidification process, several changes occurred: production rhythm, work space management, production management, ways of operating, etc. Some solutions brought along several problems: the risk of accident, hardship and material loss. Without monitoring by the company, it is the workers that have to face these disorders, not being able, however, to avoid the hardship. Some abandoned their jobs because they could no longer bear these conditions, which is quite serious considering that what provoked the unbearable hardship situation was an alternative solution for the health problem and a demand from the inspection organ.
This article leads to the reflection that it is not a matter of opposition between the norm and what occurs in the work environment, but that it should be considered that an integration and transformation process of this norm is necessary, leading to modifications of the industrial strategies. Symmetrically, a sustainable or durable system concerning work and the workers cannot be obtained without undergoing systemic transformations.
It is systemic since it involves a propagation process of appropriation by the workers of competing and interdependent tasks to human resources management, production management, maintenance and quality, among others. These two dimensions of appropriation proved to be of fundamental importance for the analysis of the system’s component elements and for the success of the implementation of the humidification process.
Deep down, we cannot think of prevention independently from production strategies and industrial challenges. Prevention functions when there is systemic appropriation, that is, when one is capable of integrating the constraints of the prevention solution in the industrial strategy.
This research had some limitations important to point out. The first was the lack of data about the non-use of humidification, either because such data did not exist in a systematized way or because they were not provided by the companies.
Another limitation was related to the prevention agents’ practices and activities. Their work was not studied in this research. These workers’ turnover prevented the attempt to collect the history of this practice at the time of the introduction of humidification. This limit highlights the perspective of studying the practice and activities of prevention agents internal and external to the companies so as to understand the prevention agents’ professional world and their important role as possible facilitators of the systemic appropriation process at the time of the introduction of some innovation for prevention.
Conflict of interest
None to report.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
This article is an extension of the Renata Wey Berti Mendes’s doctoral thesis entitled “Apropriação sistêmica de inovações tecnológicas para a prevenção: o caso do controle de poeira em mineradoras de granito” (“Systemic appropriation of technological innovations for prevention: the case of dust control in the granite mining sector”), financed by CNPq and CAPES. It is also part of a wider project in a CAPES-COFECUB partnership “Trabalho, inovação e desenvolvimento sustentável” (“Work, innovation and sustainable development”) 702/11, whose objective is to better articulate the normative dimensioning regarding work sustainability and the conception development, integrating the questions related to work transformations.