Short answer. Article 163 requires the Department of Labor and Employment to develop medical criteria that will assure, insofar as practicable, that no employee suffers impairment or diminution in health, functional capacity, or life expectancy as a result of their work and working conditions.
What the law says
to develop medical criteria which will assure insofar as practicable that no employee will suffer impairment or diminution in health, functional capacity, or life expectancy as a result of his work and working conditions
Labor Code, Article 163 — Government Research On Safety. Read the full provision →
What the law says
It shall be the responsibility of the Department of Labor and Employment to conduct continuing studies and research to develop innovative methods, techniques and approaches for dealing with occupational safety and health problems
Labor Code, Article 163 — Government Research On Safety. Read the full provision →
The medical-criteria standard, stated directly
Article 163 sets a specific and demanding target for the criteria the Department develops. It shall be the responsibility of the Department of Labor and Employment to conduct continuing studies and research to develop innovative methods, techniques and approaches for dealing with occupational safety and health problems. That research obligation exists to serve a further goal: to develop medical criteria which will assure insofar as practicable that no employee will suffer impairment or diminution in health, functional capacity, or life expectancy as a result of his work and working conditions. The standard is protective and forward-looking, aimed at preventing harm rather than only documenting it after the fact.
'Insofar as practicable' is a real qualifier, not a loophole
The article does not promise that no worker will ever be harmed by their job — it commits the Department to pursuing that outcome to the extent it is practicable to achieve. This is a standard of diligent, ongoing effort, not an absolute assurance that harm can never happen. It obligates continuing research and the development of criteria genuinely aimed at eliminating preventable harm, not a one-time study that is filed away and never revisited as conditions and knowledge change.
Research feeds directly into the criteria
The article links research and medical criteria together for a reason: developing criteria that actually protect workers depends on first understanding how specific diseases connect to specific work environments. That is why the same article also charges the Department with discovering latent diseases by establishing causal connections between diseases and work in environmental conditions, and with developing innovative methods for identifying and addressing safety and health problems as they emerge, rather than relying only on older, static assumptions about workplace risk.
Why this matters to workers and employers
This article defines a government research and standard-setting function rather than a directly enforceable individual right, so it does not by itself give a worker a cause of action against an employer. Its practical significance is that the medical criteria and standards later applied to specific industries and occupations are supposed to trace back to this underlying, ongoing obligation to protect health, functional capacity, and life expectancy — which is the benchmark the Department is legally required to keep pursuing.