News for 2008
October
RoSPA warns over H&S cost-cutting
To mark the European Week for Safety and Health at Work, which is focusing on the prevention of accidents and ill-health at work, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) is urging employers not to cut corners on health and safety during the coming economic downturn.
This year’s European Campaign, which is marked by an awareness week running from 20-24 October, is seeking to demystify the risk assessment process.
Roger Bibbings, RoSPA Occupational Safety Advisor, says: “Given the current financial climate, there is a danger that occupational health and safety could be seen as a problem largely solved – a ‘nice-to-have’ rather than a really essential social and economic ingredient. There could be a temptation to cut corners, reduce standards or delay introducing essential protective measures.
“But we must avoid seeing an increase in the number of health and safety casualties as part of the price to be paid by workers and members of the public for the recession.
“In addition to the legal and moral reasons for preventing accidents and ill-health, employers also need to recognise the strong business case, which exists even when times are tough.”
Bibbings says that risk assessments are a case in point: “While ‘suitable and sufficient’ risk assessments are a legal requirement, they do not have to mean an overload of red tape and, properly undertaken, they should help businesses to direct scarce resources towards priority issues.”
Government funds small business staff training
Skills Secretary John Denham has announced that small businesses will be the focus of £350m of Government funds to help them train their staff. The money will be available to deliver a new package of support “to help small businesses get through the tougher economic climate by building the skills and expertise of their workers”.
The funding to support training will be drawn from the Government's 'Train to Gain' programme - the scheme that supports and subsidises staff training. Funding for the programme is planned to rise to £1bn by 2010-11. The Government will give top priority to meeting demand from small businesses in the private sector (those with up to 250 employees).
John Denham says: "Small businesses are an important engine of our economy and we must make sure that we support them during tough economic times. We are overhauling the training system to make sure that they can get help with training their staff with the very minimum of bureaucracy.
"We know that firms which invest in skills do better than those that don't, which is why we will be urging small businesses to take up this offer from Government."
The key elements of the £350m Train to Gain package are:
- relaxing the rules to allow funding for "bite-sized chunks" - small units or modules of qualifications in subjects known to be important to SMEs, such as business improvement, team-working, customer service, and risk management;
- relaxing the rules to allow workers to get training up to level 2 even if they already have a previous qualification at this level; and more funding for level 3 training; and
- a new communications campaign to begin next month to underline the benefits of upskilling and reskilling and the breadth of the support on offer from Government.
Where there is a statutory requirement in place for employers to ensure that their employees receive certain training, e.g. health and safety training, then businesses will not be able to access public funding for that training.
Focus on risk assessments
Reducing the number of work-related accidents and illnesses through competent risk assessment is the target for the European Week for Safety and Health at Work, which ran this week from 20-24 October 2008.
Organised by the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA), the week's campaign activities highlighted the importance of assessing health and safety risks. EU-OSHA has also produced a new report on risk assessment to showcase practical ways in which workplace risks can be managed and reduced.
The European Week is part of the Healthy Workplaces campaign on risk assessment. During this week hundreds of campaign events and activities will take place all over Europe. These include conferences and exhibitions, training sessions and activities where both large and small companies work together. The common theme linking all these events is promoting the importance of carrying out risk assessment in every workplace.
Jukka Takala, Director of EU-OSHA, says: “Every three-and-a-half minutes somebody in the EU dies from work-related causes and every four-and-a-half seconds an EU worker is involved in an accident that forces them to stay at home for at least three working days. This is unacceptable!
“We need a change, and this change starts with assessing workplace risks. We have to make employers, workers, safety representatives and policy makers aware that proper risk assessment is the key to good workplace safety and health management.”
The newly published risk assessment magazine is one of many initiatives to increase awareness about the importance of proper risk management. It shows examples of good practice by government ministries, employers’ organisations and trade unionists from across Europe to improve workplace risk management.
Engineering firm fined after fatal electrocution
A Scottish engineering firm has been fined £300,000 after an employee was electrocuted in 2005. Electrician Michael Adamson, 26, from Bo'ness, died while working on a live wire marked "not in use" at a JJB Fitness Centre.
His employer, Mitie Engineering Services (Edinburgh) Ltd, was found guilty of breaching health and safety laws over his death. The company was ordered to pay the fine at Dundee Sheriff Court.
Earlier this month, three of the firm's senior employees, managing director William Mitchell, operations director Scott Wallace and project and technical services manager Ian Storrar, were cleared of neglect over Mr Adamson's death. Speaking outside court, his sister Louise Adamson, 32, said she was glad the case was finally over.
She said: "Michael's life was priceless, you could never put a value on that. "The company has been fined a substantial sum but companies have been getting fines for well over 30 years.
"Scotland still has one of the worst work-related death records and until you have company individuals held responsible for these, they are unlikely to sit up and take real notice. All we can do now is hope that the safety measures brought in since Michael died will have an impact."
Private Members's Bill calls for education in health & safety
A Private Member’s Bill has been introduced to Parliament to call for health and safety training to be embedded into Britain’s education system. The Health and Safety (Education and Training) Bill was read on 22 October by George Howarth MP (Knowsley North and Sefton East) under the Ten Minute Rule.
Last year alone, 247 people were killed at work, around 274,000 were seriously injured and a further 2.2m people suffered an illness they attributed to their employment. It has been estimated that the financial cost of workplace accidents and ill health to society – including social security payments, NHS treatments and lost taxes – totals up to £31bn each year.
The new Bill focuses on every level of the workforce, from work experience, apprenticeships and diplomas, through to professional courses, such as teacher training and MBAs. It aims to drive up young people’s health and safety skills to prevent accidents happening in the first place – protecting their wellbeing and supporting productivity.
George Howarth MP explains why he is introducing the Bill: “It focuses on what I believe is the most effective tool in improving safety and health skills: education and training.
“I see all of this as part of an overall learning process, beginning in childhood and continuing through further and higher education and on throughout working life. We know that inexperience leads to an increased risk of workplace injury and sadly over the last decade, 64 of those killed at work were under 19 years old, 15,000 in this age group suffered major injuries and a further 50,000 were hurt.
“Consequently, it’s vital that we look to incorporate health and safety awareness into education before our young people begin work-based learning or start work, and that we provide adequate supervision and induction training, so that fewer lives are avoidably damaged.”
The Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) has already developed the Workplace Hazard Awareness Course (WHAC) in partnership with the HSE. The course is freely available to teachers and trainers and is aimed at year 10 pupils and older.
DWP happy over new H&S Act
Ministers in the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) have expressed ‘delight’ at the upcoming implementation of an Act which will increase penalties on those who break health and safety rules. The Health and Safety Offences Act 2008 comes into force in January. Amending Section 33 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, it raises the maximum penalties which can be imposed by lower court on those who breach health and safety legislation from £5,000 to £20,000.
The Act also increases the range of offences for which an individual may be imprisoned in both the lower and higher courts, and makes certain offences, which are currently only triable in the lower courts, triable in both lower and higher courts.
Before being approved this time, the Health and Safety Offences Bill had been presented – and rejected – four times in the House of Commons.
According to DWP Minister Lord McKenzie, the amendments brought about by the Act would result in more cases being resolved in lower courts, and a faster, cheaper and more efficient justice system: "It is generally accepted that the level of fines for some health and safety offences is too low. These changes will ensure that sentences can now be more easily set at a level to deter businesses that do not take their health and safety management responsibilities seriously and further encourage employers and others to comply with the law.
"Jail sentences for particularly blameworthy health and safety offences committed by individuals, can now be imposed reflecting the severity of such crimes, whereas there were more limited options in the past.
"I am delighted that this legislation is now on the statute book and very grateful to my colleagues Keith Hill MP and Lord Bruce Grocott for introducing the Bill and for the support received from all sides of both Houses of Parliament."
Keith Hill said that the Bill would act to complement the Corporate Manslaughter Act, but not replace it, adding: “It isn’t my intention that these new powers of imprisonment (if we were to get them) should become grounds for resisting the case for mandatory health and safety duties on directors. I think that is a case for which there is an entirely separate argument, and I want to see that properly pursued.”
Government 'cautious' over biofuels
Concerns about the indirect impacts of biofuel production have prompted new Government plans for a more cautious approach to be taken in this area. A consultation has been launched by Transport Minister Andrew Adonis to consider views on the new proposals. The consultation, which is to run until 17 December, takes forward key findings reached in a previous report commissioned by the Government in February this year.
The ‘Gallagher Review’, led by Professor Ed Gallagher, Chair of the Renewable Fuels Agency, had examined the latest evidence on the wider social and environmental impacts of biofuels. It was found that although there was “a future” for a sustainable biofuels industry, there was also a need for further evidence to establish any wider impacts of their use.
A number of recommendations were made, and later accepted by the Government. Findings to be included in the new consultation include proposals that:
- the rate of increase of the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) be slowed to 0.5% per annum, taking the level to 5% in 2013-14 rather than in 2010-11 as is the case currently;
- two new eligible fuels - biobutanol and hydrogenated renewable diesel – are added to the list of renewable fuels eligible under the RTFO;
- the UK continues to support the EU target of 10% renewable transport fuels by 2020, but that this is conditional on evidence showing that it is being delivered sustainably and without significant impacts on food prices;
- the Government presses for the 10% target to be kept under regular review in the light of the emerging evidence;
- that the sustainability criteria for biofuels, currently being negotiated, should address indirect, as well as direct, effects on land use; and
- the UK works to establish international standards and controls, which reflect the international nature of the biofuels industry.
Mr Adonis has also announced that a further £6m is being dedicated to research being carried out by the Carbon Trust. This research aims to accelerate the development of advanced sustainable biofuels technologies. Mr Adonis says: “Everyone agrees that to tackle climate change we must develop new and cleaner fuels. But we are clear that biofuels will only have a role to play in this if they are sustainably produced.
"That is why the Government commissioned Professor Gallagher to examine the indirect impacts of biofuels, and we have accepted his recommendation to amend but not abandon our approach.
“We need to take a more cautious approach to biofuels and today’s consultation sets out our options, as well as dedicating a further £6m to helping ensure that second generation biofuels are truly sustainable.”
Work injury leads to fine
A company has been fined a total of £6,855 after inadequate machine guarding resulted in the injury of an employee. The employee was working for Wilkin & Sons Ltd of Tiptree, Essex when the accident occurred on 22 February. A machine used for shredding orange peel had become blocked, and the employee was working to unblock it.
However, a lack of adequate guarding was in place on the machine, which meant that the worker was able to reach inside the machine whilst it was still running. The tip of the employee’s finger was cut off as it came into contact with a rotating bladed roller.
Wilkin & Sons Ltd pleaded guilty to two breaches of legislation at Colchester Magistrates’ Court, and was fined £4,000 with costs of £2,855. These fines included:
- £3000 for a breach of Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act; and
- £1000 for a breach of Regulation 11 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) 1998.
The HSE has now released a warning to companies that they must ensure machine guarding is properly maintained. HSE Inspector Kim Wicks says: "The dangers of using machines without suitable safeguards are well known. This serious incident should have been prevented by the company ensuring that dangerous parts of the machine were adequately guarded.
"This case illustrates how things can go wrong when risks are not properly controlled and HSE will not hesitate to take action against those who fall short of the law in such a way."
Company fined for tanker fall
A Scottish transport company has been fined £5,000 after a tanker driver died in a fall from his vehicle. James Robert Hutchinson worked for Carntyne Transport Ltd of Glasgow. The accident occurred in February 2007. Mr Hutchinson, from Tillicoultry, appeared to have been setting the valves for a delivery of animal feed when he fell three metres from the top of a tanker.
Cupar Sheriff Court head that there was no safety rail provided on the driver’s side of the vehicle. Mr Hutchinson was later discovered by two farm workers. Carntyne Transport Ltd pleaded guilty to a charge brought under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, in that the company failed to provide a safe place to work and safe systems of work.
Section 2(1) of the 1974 Act imposes a duty upon the employer to ensure the health safety and welfare at work of employees, so far as is reasonably practicable. HSE Inspector Robert Fraser says: "Mr Hutchinson's death was entirely preventable and arose from the clear failure to carry out a risk assessment and ensure there was safe access to the top of the vehicle.
"Although Workplace Transport injuries form a fairly small part of all accidents at work, they are more likely to result in serious injuries and much more likely to lead to fatalities.
"HSE figures have shown that every week one person dies from a slip, trip or fall at work and every 25 minutes, someone breaks or fractures a bone at work. This is unacceptable and employers should ensure that they do everything in their power to prevent this type of accident occurring."
Council deems 'A-boards' a risk
A decision by City of York Council to prosecute businesses that display ‘A-boards’ outside premises has prompted questions about where an employer’s health and safety responsibility ends. A complaint that standing signs placed on the pavement posed a health and safety risk to blind people has led to businesses in York being warned that a failure to remove the ‘obstructive’ boards could potentially result in a fine of up to £2,500.
The move has been met with outrage by some business owners, who believe that they could end up losing business as a result of the council’s decision. However, the argument raises questions about the extent to which managers can be responsible for the health and safety of members of the public, and at what point the business perimeter – and subsequently, the employer’s duty to protect the health, safety and welfare of both employees and non-employees – ends.
The health and safety of all non-employees who work on a premises must be ensured, so far as is reasonably practicable, by those individuals with total or partial control of the work premises. Therefore, landlords and managing agents may be responsible for the safety of those working in the common parts of the buildings (for example, cleaners, maintenance staff, etc) whilst non-domestic tenants will be responsible for the health and safety of any person in the areas covered by their lease.
Also, last week (2 October), a pub in Orpington was found to have committed a breach of Section 137 of the Highways Act 1980 by placing two advertising boards on the pavement outside the premises. Under Section 137 of the Act, it is an offence for any person – including a body corporate – to wilfully obstruct a highway.
The boards in question were approximately three feet high by two feet wide. A previous warning had been issued requiring the boards to be removed. When this warning was found not to have been complied with, legal action was taken. Wayside Taverns (Orpington) Limited, former licensees of the Priory Tavern, was subsequently fined £500 for the breach, as well as costs of £200, and a surcharge of £15.
Speaking about the case, Peter Turvey, Head of Street Environment, says: “Placing large advertising boards on the public footway is against the law and could cause problems for parents with buggies, elderly people and those with disabilities."
So what might be the best practice for businesses who wish to continue advertising in such a way? According to Katie Dock, Information Officer at the Centre for Accessible Environments, businesses may be best advised to consider alternative methods of advertising where there is a risk of any obstruction of the public highway:
“When A-boards are placed on the footway, they reduce the clear width available to anyone travelling along the street. To give a benchmark figure for what is acceptable, we can turn to the Department for Transport’s best practice guidance, Inclusive Mobility. This states that a width of 2000mm allows two wheelchair users to pass each other comfortably.
“Even when this width is achieved, the addition of obstacles such as posts and A-boards will reduce the width substantially. Obstructions on a footway may be particularly troublesome for visually impaired pedestrians, especially when obstructions have the potential to change position from day to day, such as in the case of A-boards.
“It is advisable for business owners to consider alternative means of promoting their services, such as on a protruding overhead sign, fixed to the building, which can be seen from further down the street. Local councils may also have a role to play: where A-boards are placed on public land, local authorities may have a duty under the Disability Discrimination Act to ensure that disabled people have reasonable access to the footways.”
Developer fined over inadequate site fencing
A Lancashire property developer has been fined £6,000 with costs of £4,500 after it failed to act on a series of HSE warnings. In February 2007, the HSE visited a site at Warbreck Gardens, Blackpool, where the company, Chelford Properties Ltd , was developing new residential properties. Local residents had reported to police that the boundary fence was in a poor state, and that children were getting into the site. The police in turn had alerted the HSE.
Upon inspection of the site, it was found that the fence was indeed in an unsatisfactory state. In addition, it was found that the site did not have an adequate traffic management, resulting in people who were walking on the site being put in danger from construction vehicles.
HSE Inspector Alasdair Green served two Improvement Notices. These required that the boundary fence was made safe, and that arrangements for controlling vehicle and pedestrian movements were improved. Blackpool Magistrates Court heard that four Improvement Notices had previously been served by the HSE, addressing similar failings on other sites controlled by Chelford Properties Ltd. Furthermore, the company’s own health and safety consultants had on a number of occasions warned that improvements needed to be made at the Warbreck Gardens site.
The company pleaded guilty to two charges:
- a breach of Regulation 16(1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994, which states that an employer must take reasonable steps to ensure that only authorised people are allowed onto any premises or part of a premises where construction work is being carried out; and
- a breach of Regulation 15 of the Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996, which provides that construction sites must be organised to allow pedestrians and vehicles to move safety and without risks to health, so far as is reasonably practicable.
The HSE has reminded construction companies that they are likely to face prosecution if they ignore advice about risks. HSE Inspector Alasdair Green says: “This is a company that has repeatedly put the safety of both the public and its own workforce at risk by not securing sites and by failing to manage pedestrian and vehicle movements. Construction bosses have a duty of care to ensure that their sites are operated in a safe way and to prevent members of the public from gaining access. Putting these matters right was neither expensive or technically difficult.
“This company received numerous warnings, both from the HSE and from its own safety experts, about areas where it needed to improve, but it failed to take heed of the warnings. This company must take safety issues seriously. Company directors and managers are being encouraged to work through a checklist to help them understand what is meant by "good health and safety leadership".
The checklist, published by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), is based around guidance developed by the HSE and the Institute of Directors (IoD), first published in October last year. The HSE said the new online checklist was an opportunity for those in business to "assess their leadership status."
Norwich Union Risk Services (NURS) training and consultancy manager, John Phillips, has urged company board members and others with health and safety responsibilities to make use of the tool. He says: "Good leadership is critical when it comes to managing occupational safety and health.
"Direction and commitment must come from the top. The checklist is certainly an important supplement to the IoD guide. I'd strongly urge both company directors and health and safety managers to visit the HSE site and work through the ten questions it poses."
Highlighting one particular question, which asks, "how are you ensuring all staff – including the board – are sufficiently trained and competent in their health and safety responsibilities?", he said this emphasised the importance of board members being suitably qualified to deal with health and safety issues.
Research carried out by NURS earlier this year revealed that almost half (42%) of companies were unable to demonstrate that their nominated board member - with responsibility for health and safety - had any formally recognised qualifications, such as NEBOSH or IOSH.
The HSE leadership checklist can be viewed here.
Working Time Regulations opt-out may end
The right of UK employees to opt-out of the Working Time Regulations may again be hanging in the balance, after it was revealed that the Labour Party conference has backed a union call for Britain’s opt out to end. The Working Time Directive exists to put in place a limit on the number of hours that may be worked per week. The UK’s ‘opt-out’ clause allows businesses to ask individuals for their agreement not to be subject to this limit.
The second reading of the revised EU Working Time Directive is due to take place on 25th. September in the European Parliament. The European Commission has previously proposed to restrict or to reject the opt-out within three years of a new Directive being implemented, but in June an agreement was reached by MEPs to preserve the right for UK workers to opt out of the Working Time Regulations.
The cited benefits of the opt-out include the opportunity for employees to engage in more flexible working than if a strict limit of 48 hours was enforced. However, the decision by the UK to allow the opt-out clause has been repeatedly challenged by unions, which claim that it increases the risk of businesses taking advantage of their employees.
Labour Party spokespersons have said that the vote on the working time opt-out, which happened earlier this week at the conference, did not commit the Party to ending the opt-out.
The results of the vote have caused widespread confusion as to whether the opportunity to opt-out will continue to exist for workers in the UK. The GMB union has now stated that it will support any decision by the Labour Party to end the opt-out, with its General Secretary, Paul Kenny, saying: “No back street Labour Party spin doctor can alter the fact that the Labour Party conference voted, virtually unanimously, to end the opt-out. Unequivocally, that is Labour Party policy and the Labour Party MEPs will fight for that policy with the full support of GMB.”
The current Working Time Regulations allow a worker to opt out of the 48-hour week restriction by written agreement in a number of ways, including by way of an amendment to the individual’s contract of employment, but it must be in writing and must be terminable by the worker on a minimum of seven days’ (but not more than three months’) notice. Even if the worker has agreed to opt out he or she cannot be required to work excessively long hours if this creates a reasonably foreseeable risk to health and safety.
Company directors and managers are being encouraged to work through a checklist to help them understand what is meant by "good health and safety leadership". The checklist, published by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), is based around guidance developed by the HSE and the Institute of Directors (IoD), first published in October last year.
The HSE said the new online checklist was an opportunity for those in business to "assess their leadership status." Norwich Union Risk Services (NURS) training and consultancy manager, John Phillips, has urged company board members and others with health and safety responsibilities to make use of the tool.
He says: "Good leadership is critical when it comes to managing occupational safety and health. "Direction and commitment must come from the top."The checklist is certainly an important supplement to the IoD guide. I'd strongly urge both company directors and health and safety managers to visit the HSE site and work through the ten questions it poses."
Highlighting one particular question, which asks, "how are you ensuring all staff – including the board – are sufficiently trained and competent in their health and safety responsibilities?", he said this emphasised the importance of board members being suitably qualified to deal with health and safety issues.
Research carried out by NURS earlier this year revealed that almost half (42%) of companies were unable to demonstrate that their nominated board member - with responsibility for health and safety - had any formally recognised qualifications, such as NEBOSH or IOSH.
The HSE leadership checklist can be viewed here.
Costs of workplace accidents revealed
According to the HSE, in Great Britain in 2006-2007 2.2 million people were suffering from an illness they believe was caused or made worse by their work and 141,350 injuries to employees were reported under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR).
Of course, the first step for employers is to take steps to prevent risks to their employee’s health and safety. HSE statistics record that in the UK in Great Britain in 2006-2007, 36 million working days (an average of 1.5 days per worker) were lost; 30 million to work related ill health and 6 million due to work place injury.
These figures in themselves are shocking but even more so when taken with the consequential costs to employers; £3.9-7.8 billion. In addition, the total costs to society and the economy are far in excess of these figures.
We therefore all have a vested interest in ensuring that workplace health and safety risks are reduced if they cannot be eliminated altogether.
Companies fined for forklift accident
Two companies have been fined a total of £67,500 after a worker was crushed by a forklift truck. 34-year-old Shane Neal was killed whilst carrying out work on the Building Research Establishment (BRE) site in May 2003. The accident occurred in a hanger at a former RAF base in Cardington, Bedfordshire.
Luton Crown Court heard how Mr Neal was manouvering the truck in order to dismantle a fire test rig, when the vehicle overturned. A HSE investigation into the accident found that Mr Neal was not adequately trained to drive the vehicle. Mr Neal’s employer was Welwood Roofing Services Ltd of Corby.
The company, which is now in administration, was charged with a breach of section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, and was fined £50,000 with costs of £25,000 after pleading guilty to this charge.
A second company, BRE in Watford, was fined £17,500 with £12,000 costs after pleading guilty to a breach of Regulation 9(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998.
In light of the incident, the HSE has warned employers to ensure that their employees are properly trained in using workplace equipment, with HSE Inspector Alison Ashworth saying: "I hope this tragic accident makes it clear to employers that they need to take positive action to manage risks, particularly where the work involves using forklift trucks. Mr Neal's death could have been avoided had the companies involved carried out checks to confirm whether or not he knew of the dangers of forklift trucks and how to drive them safely.
"HSE will not hesitate to take action against those who fall short of the law in such a way."
