What it regulates and since when it has been applied
Supreme Decree 44, enacted in 2023 and published in 2024, entered into force on February 1, 2025. It replaced Decrees 40 and 54 of 1969 and incorporates rules for preventive management and joint committees. It is linked to Law 16.744 and to the protection obligations of Chilean labor legislation.
The transition requires reviewing documents and practices. Simply changing the number of a standard in a procedure does not demonstrate that the organization has adapted its system. It is necessary to examine what processes are carried out, who is involved, how a measure is decided, and what information reaches those exposed. This fact sheet provides general guidance; sector-specific requirements still require specific review.
Hazard matrix and risk assessment
The matrix must represent actual processes, tasks, and positions, taking into account the characteristics of the people involved. The regulations address ergonomic and psychosocial risks, violence and harassment, as well as accidents and illnesses. It is reviewed at least annually and also in response to changes and events stipulated by the standard.
To develop it, it’s helpful to walk through the tasks with those who perform them. Hazard identification and risk assessment lose their value if they simply reproduce a template without checking for occasional operations, maintenance, or abnormal situations. Each assessment must be explainable: what was observed, what exposure exists, and why action is needed. A number without context makes it difficult to decide and subsequently verify the improvement.
Preventive program and control of measures
The program is developed or modified within thirty calendar days of the creation or update of the matrix. It must specify measures, deadlines, and responsible parties, and have the corresponding approval. Preventive planning thus transforms the assessment into actionable commitments that can be monitored and verified.
It is advisable to describe verifiable results. “Improving order” leaves too many decisions open; defining a storage area, removing obstacles, and verifying its maintenance allows for work management. When an action is not completed, the cause, temporary protection, and the new decision must be recorded. An overdue date does not disappear simply because a new version of the program is issued.
Information and training
Information on risks, corrective measures, and methods must be provided promptly, before work begins and whenever relevant changes require it. The training required by Article 16 has a minimum duration of eight hours and a frequency defined in the program that cannot exceed two years. Its regulatory content must also be reviewed.
Occupational safety and health (OSH) training needs to be tailored to the job and comprehension verified. A general overview may be insufficient to recognize a hazardous condition or use a control measure. It is helpful to distinguish between initial information, practical training, and refresher courses: they serve related functions, but signing in for only one activity does not automatically qualify participants for all of them.
Participation and organization of prevention
The Labor Directorate identifies the following instruments within the decree: joint committees, prevention departments, internal regulations, risk maps, and consultation mechanisms. The applicable structure depends on the specific circumstances being regulated. The Chilean joint committee must be integrated into preventive work and have access to the information necessary to perform its functions.
A clear organizational structure prevents each instrument from functioning as an independent file. Inspection findings can feed into the matrix; committee proposals, into the program; and approved changes, into training. It is advisable to identify who communicates each result and who has the authority to allocate resources, so that participation leads to verifiable decisions and responses.
Smaller businesses
The decree outlines a management approach tailored to entities with up to twenty-five employees. The official guidelines include policy, evaluation, and a program, supported by technical assistance from the administering agency. The smaller size does not eliminate the need to understand the risks or adopt appropriate measures; it simply allows for organizing the system with tools adapted to that reality.
In a small company, it can be practical to compile commitments in a simple record, provided it contains sufficient information. It should be possible to identify the hazard, the corresponding measure, and its status without relying on a single person’s memory. Useful documentation also facilitates continuity when the person coordinating prevention changes or a new activity is introduced.
Practical example
In a hypothetical scenario, a workshop introduces a cleaning operation using a different product. Before implementing it, the workshop reviews hazards, conditions of use, and potential hazards. It requests technical support when needed and updates the assessment. Then, it assigns ventilation, storage, and information improvements to specific individuals and verifies their implementation.
The monitoring system detects that the container is temporarily stored in an unauthorized area. The organization corrects the cause and reviews the procedure with the team. The value of the system lies in its ability to observe and correct, as well as maintain records. This example does not replace a professional product evaluation nor does it, by itself, define sufficient controls.
How to review the implementation
A practical review can follow a task from the initial assessment to on-site implementation: locating the hazard, verifying the agreed-upon measures, speaking with those exposed, and examining their effectiveness. It is also advisable to verify that current instruments align with the company’s structure and that outdated references do not conceal outstanding obligations that need to be adapted.
The assistance of the administering body helps in interpreting and applying the framework. Corporate responsibility also requires independent decisions and resources. Periodically reviewing effectiveness allows us to distinguish between a documented action and an improvement that sustainably protects employees, incorporating lessons learned into the next planning cycle.
