Health And Safety Frequently Asked Questions.
Stan Allen and Neal Etchells answer your questions.
Employees.
How does all this Health And Safety stuff help or affect me? And anyway does it mean I get paid more!
In the late sixties a committee of learned and upstanding public minded persons were asked to form a committee chaired by the retired chairman of the The National Coal Board , Lord Robens.
It was apparent that as work processes were getting more complicated and work persons demanded better health and safety prospects some of the old factory acts where being used as a tool of financial gain by the unions and the real regulation of the work-place anticipated by the law makers was regularly bogged down in restrictive practices and time wasting power plays by employers and politically motivated worker representatives. It was apparent that working conditions and welfare issues should be subtracted from the regular pay and productivity disagreements and placed on the statute book in a form that was a clear and an unequivocal specified duty of care for employers to provide safe systems of work unrelated to profit or work performance targets. The Health and Safety at Work 1974 enabling act enshrines your right as work person to have coherent instructions and simple procedures to allow you to carry out your work activity in a considered and risk assessed "safe system of work". Furthermore if the safe system of work set by your employer and your safety representatives is carried out fairly and diligently your claim for damage if an incident occurs will not only be easy to settle but will be underwritten by the employers insurance company and probably paid without dispute. If on the other hand your employer can prove that you deliberately ignored the safe system of work instructions then a case of negligence could be proved against a dilatory work person. The act, regulations and codes of best practice lock all work place participants into the virtuous circle of obligation and responsible pro-activity when it comes to safeguarding the health and safety of your co-workers and the duty of care of the employer.
The pay and conditions of the employee do not normally respect any financial conventions when health and safety is concerned. It is more likely that an employer that is looking after your well being in a positive and considerate manner may not be able to offer you a share of enhanced profits gained at the expense of your safety and continuing good health. In some cases work persons sign away their entitlement to good working conditions for more income in the faulty assumption that by risking their health and safety for an unregulated employer will get them a disproportionate amount of the gains made by ignoring safe systems of work. In an ideal world if all companies and countries could have an equal benchmark for health and safety the question of sacrificing your health and safety for financial gain or continued employment would not be an such a corrosive and debilitating issue.
Employees need to be sure that in discussions regarding health and safety that hidden agendas to slow a work process or to up the cost of production will always run contrary to the true spirit of producing a level playing field for all in the workplace. Using mechanised equipment and improving a work process will in most cases balance the risk and reward for employers and all participants in the workplace this can lead in some case to better conditions and improved pay prospects.
High productivity by competent well trained persons using safe systems of work that are paid a realistic market rate for their work will remain the gaol of a well regulated society. We must not sneer at those countries that place health and safety at the top their agenda if we also wish to reduce accidents and ill health in all of our workplaces and we cannot ignore that developing countries will need the time and assistance to develop the sensible regulation of the wider world workplace.
I think something is "not safe" who do I tell?
If your workplace has a total of five or more persons working in that enterprise including directors, the law states that the company, enterprise or undertaking needs to have a formally considered, written and published safety policy. This document may constitute one page or one volume depending the size and complexity of the work operation or works undertaken by the enterprise. In some cases an institutional or voluntary operation may not see themselves as one of these types of business undertakings. But in short if five or more persons work together to perform a task for profit or not the way that task or operation is performed needs to have a policy, competent persons, named duty holders and safety procedures stated and observed throughout the workplace. Therefore if a process or piece of equipment is not safe you should consult your company safety policy and ask your safety representative, manager or employer what is the correct method or procedure to carry out the task in question. More training or a better piece of equipment might need to be considered by your managers or directors to improve safety or reduce the risks of an accident occurring in the workplace in question. In small factories or offices this can be achieved in most cases effectively by maintaining pressure on line managers or the safety directors however in large companies and institutions inertia can be endemic and a formal complaint might be a method of noting your concern. A letter or fax to head office can sometimes be a wake up call to directors or managers that reasonable work practices are not being carried out n your workplace. If your employer or their agents are not addressing your concerns in a reasonable and practical manner then the next step will be to contact the The Local Factory Inspector at the local Health And Safety Office. The address of this agency should be noted on the Health And Safety At Work Poster on your notice board. In some cases you may be directed to contact the Local Environmental Officer at the council offices, if you are unsure of your rights and where to go you can contact the local citizens advise bureau they can solve many problems for you if you have legitimate concerns. It must be stressed that a sensible discussion of your problems regarding procedures and equipment with your employer can sometimes be more beneficial if you have information that is relevant to your complaint and you are not depending on second hand knowledge of your rights as citizen. After all it is more important to initiate progress and make gradual improvements in some cases with the cooperation of all of the workforce and management than to try and force a contentious issue. In many work scenarios safety problems can be resolved by careful consideration of the risk or acquiring improved equipment or by changing badly organised work procedures.
If all sensible dispute, claim or work process complaint resolution fails contact a solicitor that specializes in personal injury or liability cases. For a modest initial fee they will appraise the relevance of your claim or case prospect and suggest methods to arrange the correct presentation of your case to the relevant parties.
If I know or have used a method of working that is quicker and better than I have been instructed and have sustained an injury or maybe caused an accident whose fault is it?
This is a common complaint in industry, you try your best to be more productive and as a result you sustain an injury and the manager blames your method of working. The fact is that your employer is charged with the duty of only employing competent persons to carry out work tasks. Your employer may feel that you do not need to receive any training to upgrade your present skill level. Your employer then is self-accrediting you to carry out the function you have been asked to perform. If you have been issued with written instructions or a method statement of how to carry out the task it will be difficult for you not to carry out the work task in any other way without taking responsibility for any failure of the process. If on the other hand you decide to short cut the formal procedure laid down to carry out a task then you alone take responsibility for that act. It may be that your employer is aware of your shortcuts and has ignored the risk to you in that case there may be a shared liability. The fundamental of this question to be considered is that if your employer has procedures and methods noted and well known in the workplace, then to ignore them would be a breech of your duty of care and obligation not to interfere with equipment and procedures that exist (or prevail, or are set) to reduce the risk of accidents or ill health in the workplace.
If I do a bit of first aid on an out of date certificate in an emergency will I get sued or could I be liable to be sued?
Anybody administering first aid in good faith in an emergency will not be running the risk of being sued. Although employers have an obligation to provide emergency first aid cover through nominated persons it not incumbent on the individual to keep records or remember when they need a refresher course. The employer and the nominated first aid duty holder need to keep accurate and up to date records. Secondary level negligence by a first aid person in the workplace can of course happen in extreme circumstances but the primary duty of care rests with the employer. The administering of the wrong palliatives to diabetics or persons with nervous problems could present a real problem but your employer is charged with risk assessing this likelihood and having sufficient trained persons in the workplace to minimise this risk. In any occupation or work situation we need to be competent and to consider the risk of our actions so we can never be totally isolated from the charge of negligence or incompetence. But if your workplace places importance on team skills and you consider each other in a positive way the risk of being sued by your workmates should not be an issue to contemplate except in the most rare, complicated and extreme circumstances. What is generally needed is for more persons to come forward to train for first aid in the workplace. The Accident And Emergency Department of the local hospital is normally so busy dealing with acute patients that to clog up the casualty with minor injuries it is not the best way forward and to send more patients at crucial times seems reckless at best. Dealing with minor accidents and injuries in our workplace should be a way of realising how much time is wasted by exposing the workforce to unnecessary risk and the injuries that can result in accomplishing simple work tasks.
Do I have to cooperate with my employer and follow his rules, which stifle my productivity and creativity?
The short answer to this question is "yes" most emphatically. However your employer has a duty to select a safety committee and or nominate competent persons in the workplace to consider and analyse health and safety work related issues. If you can present a coherent and substantive case for implementing work procedures that you feel are beneficial and do not constitute a hazard then your employer can and may adopt the strategy. All processes need to be risk assessed however and your bright idea may have consequences down the line that render the idea hazardous, by considering all relevant factors a proper conclusion can be made which should any not compromise any one persons ideals. Who carries out this assessment thing anyway? My boss or an outside agency.
The Management Of Health And Safety Regulations impose an obligation on your employer to carry out a risk assessment of the normal work activities from time to time or when changes are made to the normal work routines that might have an effect on the health and safety of the workforce or any overlapping undertakings. The company should have competent persons in house to carry out this function. Many companies do not have the depth of management or depend on third party service providers for key functions of their main business activity. If your company does not have the skills to risk assess or manage health and safety then they can appoint outside or third party competent persons to assist with this activity. In the long run it is hoped that these vital skills will be a part of company core disciplines, high risk ventures or complex activity companies have less choice in this matter the need for safety professionals is of little doubt if your company expects high risk tasks to be carried out.
I have complained of what I consider to be an unsafe practice many times to my manager what can I do next?
All complaints eventually should be made in writing and noted by your line manager. If you have little success convincing your manager then you should ask your safety representative to take the matter further to the works safety committee. If you cannot get any satisfaction from the safety committee write a letter to the managing director or the person who signs the company health and safety policy. If you have no success with the primary duty holder then you will normally contact your union or the Factory Inspector noted on the Health And Safety At Work Poster on the works or office notice board. Persons working in offices and shops and non-industrial situations may have to call the local environmental officer at the council offices. Once a complaint is made to the factory inspector or council officer you may be asked to swear out a statement of fact, you need to be sure that you have exhausted all internal avenues before you engage the assistance of an outside agency. If you are not absolutely sure of your facts write a report and a diary of events to act as your aide memoir, if the situation drags on for a length of time hard facts will be required to press your case for improvement or negligence.
How do I know if I am at risk of injury at work?
You employer has a duty of care to provide safe systems of work in the workplace. This in the case of a work person means that if you feel unsure, unsafe or at risk from your work you have every right to ask for a proper consideration of your safety, health or welfare within the work environment. Your employer also has the duty to risk assess the work processes and welfare in the workplace from time to time to establish whether the work process puts you, visitors or co-workers at risk. Although the rights of you the individual are enshrined in law, fair consideration of risk and welfare in workplace can be a subjective and an emotional issue for employers and employees alike, ideally the works should have a competent safety advisor to smooth irregularity in health and safety management before it becomes a problem. Developing reasonable risk reduction measures and adequate welfare facilities can be difficult for small and medium sized enterprises therefore the employer may be the competent person to assess risk, in some cases external advisors may be appointed to act in a part time capacity to evaluate certain risks. To retain a fair and level playing field all avenues of balanced discussion and workplace cooperation should be considered before entering into a combative approach with managers regarding health, safety and risk reduction in the workplace.
However if all reasonably practical or sensible approaches to managers or your employer fail to improve your feeling of security or safety in the workplace then do not hesitate to report the matter to the appropriate authority, HSE, Local Authority or Government Agency.
What is the practical solution when a key and popular member of staff refuses to wear the personal protective equipment issued by the employer to reduce a known risk to the operative in the workplace?
The only way good compliance concerning PPE can be achieved is if all levels of staff and line management lead by demonstrating a positive attitude and wearing sometimes cumbersome and uncomfortable protective equipment in the workplace. Peer group pressure and a lighthearted approach can sometimes be exerted to bring a colleague in line with proper procedure. If all reasonable methods are employed without success then the team may no choice but to exclude the person from the works team and discuss some form of transfer from a dangerous work procedure to a less demanding role without the risk to fellow workmates. Maintaining a common approach to health and safety in a fast moving workplace is all about teamwork, non combative motivation and the encouragement of a positive ethos that is good for all workplace participants not just for the most vocal or individualistic person in the office or the work place.
Is it possible to fulfil part of my Duty of Care by using wall posters to warn and inform workers?
Wall posters and motivational text can be a most beneficial, subtle and benign way to enforce the safety message in the workplace. Most mature workers are always ready to defend bad habits and methods of work that may no longer deserve merit in the workplace. If posters are strategically positioned so that the work person can discretely consult information to do with health and safety work procedures a good deal of the normal arguments can be reduced. Wall posters do not argue back they only serve to inform and reinforce a message of excellence, as the old writers have often said a picture can convey the information of a thousand words. Simple straight forward pictorial information that is fresh and relevant can save lives and allow employers to drill down the safety message into dangerous or normal work areas.
I want to work on a construction site in my holidays from University to get some cash. Are there any problems with this?
There are always problems with persons only wanting to work for money. Temporary jobs and purely money driven pursuits tend to attract low paid workers and questionable welfare for desperate people. The construction industry has a long history of some cynical employers using low paid, unskilled or naive migrant labour to deliver low cost buildings to a demanding client base. The benchmark for any manual labour job is the competence of the individual to carry out the specified task, the law requires a minimum level of training to carry out even low skilled operations. A student may be able to hump bags of fertiliser in the garden for a parent but when the same bags contain cement and are needed to be humped in a dangerous environment or under scaffolding the risk becomes higher. Work on a construction site in the past was a fairly slow and un-mechanised activity, now mechanical handling and large temporary access scaffolding to the workplace can make the building site a far more dangerous place to be! It is important that to work on a building site a person is aware of the risk, even working in a temporary capacity safety training must be delivered and heeded by the student or temporary worker.
Employees should also be aware that if menial tasks are undertaken the correct manual handling skills are employed and the person should note that only competent persons should present themselves for work at a construction site. It may be the case that if you make a fraudulent claim regarding your skill to carry out simple tasks the responsibility could be yours if an accident occurs as a result of your negligence. The world of work in many traditional industries has changed to keep up with technical improvements in handling machinery and the demands of prudent clients to reduce cost, it may even be the case that even an intelligent student may not have sufficient knowledge to avoid and manage risk on a very dangerous working construction site. When you balance the risk to reward ratio it might be better to find less hazardous employment that will not injure your body or your long term education prospects.
Mangers Ask?
Why do I need a safety policy document?
The Health And Safety At Work Act 1974 requires enterprises or any form of working entity to have a health and safety policy regarding the manner in which it undertakes it work activities. The need for a written health and safety policy document is a legal requirement of undertakings that employ more than five persons including the directors, managers, self-employed or separately sub-contracted employees. The safety policy should identify and document the way a company intends to carry out its main activities and how it will ensure that the work does not constitute a risk to the health and safety of the workforce or visitors to the work operations. A clear and coherent specification of the persons who will manage health and safety and a clear identification of the procedures that will be employed to underpin the policy as produced. The naming and clear identification of duty holders in a safety policy will ensure that a positive approach will be employed by the nominated person in the discharge of their stated duty. The duty of care that is owed in the modern workplace cannot be borne by one person; a fair distribution of responsibilities and delegation of procedure is needed and this can only be recorded or documented in a safety policy and procedure document. Depending on the size of the undertaking the policy may range from a few pages of A4 to a properly bound manual. However whatever the size or complexity of the policy it must be bought to the attention of the workforce. Consideration must be given as to whether the policy and procedure of the company will reduce the risk of accident or ill health to reasonably practical minimum. It also important that the safety policy and procedure documents are reviewed from time to time to ensure that they accurately reflect the risk and current legislation that regulates that particular workplace. If an accident, ill health or an incident occurs that is subsequently investigated by a regulating authority then the safety policy and procedure document will be audited or vetted to see if the employer has taken all reasonable steps to reduce foreseeable risk to health and safety in the workplace under that persons control.
If I've got a health and safety policy why do I need to carry out an expensive risk assessment?
The health and safety policy of a company can only be considered if all the possible participants have considered and assessed the likelihood and nature of the risk in the workplace. The work of an enterprise and the equipment used often changes to improve productivity or the turnover of work increases. When any aspect of work changes in the workplace then we are charged with the duty to consider the implications on the workforce. A risk analysis and assessment can lessen the prospect of ill health or physical risk in the future. Often reducing staff or improving productivity by implementing new machinery can alleviate physical problems but induce psychological problems leading to increased stress in some cases. Good in house risk assessments can allow the staff and the workforce to discuss and implement best practice to render better productivity without consequential risk to the workforce. Using outside risk assessment need not be expensive if in house costs are set against possible fee cost, outside agencies can sometimes bring a fresh perspective to solving problems. The cross fertilisation of ideas can also be an advantage of using third party assessors in the workplace. In any event a coherent safety strategy cannot be formulated without a fundamental knowledge of the impact of risk in the workplace you may control. Whether your risk assessment is expensive or low cost the need for careful scrutiny of the procedure employed to reduce risk in the workplace will always work out to be cheaper than a personal injury claim if you are unfortunate enough to be considered wilfully negligent.
And what does this risk assessment do for me?
As a manager a risk assessment proves that you have considered the work process under your control and to the best of your current ability you understand the risks inherent in accomplishing the noted task. If you do not fully comprehend the risk involved to fulfil exacting work tasks it may be that your are not competent to control that task without further training. Risk analysis can be a way of measuring performance and the training or skill to accomplish demanding tasks. Managers need to direct their staff in a practical manner, training and up skilling is a feature of the modern workplace that can ensure the use of current best practice and by using tried and tested methods a more compliant workplace can be achieved. The need for constant professional development or life long learning techniques allows the latest risk reduction methods to be absorbed and administered by committed managers in the workplace.
What's the chance of health and safety being driven by insurance companies rather than HSE Inspectors and is it likely to work better than the present system?
The Government are always looking at reducing the cost of implementation of services. The HSE are looking at ways to improve compliance. The only business that will enjoy improved profits by better compliance will be insurance companies. It is therefore fair to assume that the insurance industry will call for tighter legislation and better control of industry as the cost of health care and personal injury claims go ever higher. Most services are now performed by private agencies with Public Regulators I believe the prospect of private companies enforcing health and safety regulations controlled by the HSE are not far off! Whether this system will work better and whether the Government will use this as a way of revenue enhancement, only time and future experience will tell.
Why does the HSE not keep a tighter lid on things and prevent accidents rather than just report on them?
The HSE was not set up as policing authority; its role in the work place was always to encourage the adoption and implementation of good health and safety regulation in the workplace. It is not possible to adopt a combative attitude to industry and then sit down and discuss ways of reducing risks in certain high-risk undertakings if you are then charged with policing your collaborators. The law was set up in such a way that an infringement of the Health And Safety At Work Act 1974 was deemed to be a criminal act of negligence therefore the crown prosecution service could enforce a case of negligence. Although the investigation and reporting of wrong doers is carried out by the HSE the idea is that prohibition and enforcement notices should ensure that companies are stopped from killing and maiming people at a very early stage. To operate a business or to be a director confers a very onerous responsibility on the person concerned, it was thought that these obligations would lessen the incidence of ill health and accidents in the workplace. If the role of the HSE and The Local Authority were to be too pro-active their primary aim of improving the workplace for all participants may be impossible, there are no winners or losers in health and safety management. The aim of the health and safety codes of best practice is too improve the prospects for risk reduction and reinforce the team characteristics of the work place. The morale of any team will be affected by a serious accident or incident therefore the HSE and all well meaning safety practitioners hope that conscience and public spiritedness will prevail to reduce the need for proscriptive policing and over bearing administration a complicated and flexible workplace.
What's the difference between health assessment and health surveillance?
A health assessment is required to establish whether an operative has a suitable health profile to carry out a certain task. A manual worker would require strong limbs and a good physical make up to perform lifting tasks. A disabled data in-putter may only need dexterity and control of basic body functions to perform a positive task in the office environment. Drivers of heavy vehicles have to have mandatory health checks to guarantee the safety of other road users, lead workers need to have medical check ups for lead levels for their own safety. There are a range of health assessments required for prospective employees that may allow or disallow their employment to carry out certain tasks these assessments are normally carried by doctors that are specialists in occupational needs or are nominated by law to carry out proscribed health checks. On the other hand health surveillance is a method employed to measure whether person are putting their health at risk by performing certain tasks. The National Health Service would like to see more health checks in the workplace, as tax payers we pay for many industrial accidents and ill health caused by companies to be treated at our expense. Good health surveillance would give early warning of impending physical impairment by work related activities, typists and dust ingesting workers suffer from cumulative injuries that only manifest themselves after many years of latent abuse. The incidence of many modern problems can only be ascertained by regular health check ups and positive or pro-active health surveillance.
Is it true that a breech of the regulations amounts to a breech of statutory duty?
A statutory duty to perform a certain task or carry out a procedure is normally only held by duty holders. To be a duty holder you need to be competent to do so and to feel that you as person understand the nature and responsibility of the duty held. Individuals therefore are not charged with the total comprehension of the law and full implementation of most health and safety regulations because it is commonly understood that most activities are carried out by a body corporate and in most examples of poor compliance an element of shared responsibility is normally determined by the judge. Regulations are the rules that are set by The HSC, The HSE with the agreement of industry through the various committees that consider these issues, The EC hands down directives but these do always turn into new regulations. Regulations primarily indicate the minimum standards that are required to manage and regulate a work process. The duty to observe those regulations is not tantamount to an absolute duty of care because the actual process in your work area may not be fully described by the regulations. The primary duty we have is to use a safe system of work for all work activities this may be a task that is regulated and also has an approved code of best practice or it may not have any such description. So all work process need to be assessed and managed in light of what could be considered by a competent person to be "safe system of work".
This is the only test that will be applied to judge negligence. The regulations and codes of practice will only be used to outline what is considered to be common and proscriptive means of accomplishing tasks in a reasonably practical and safe manner. Directors managers and operatives need to be always aware that safety law is two way street that is only judged in the light of what is historical good practice or who has ignored the prevailing rules set down by society. Regulating the work place does confer duties on nominated persons and obliges directors to manage the work safety but the thrust of our Health And Safety Law is to try and bring about constant and gradual improvement not to sanction wrong doers. Whether you breech the law in any capacity it is better not to speculate about the rights and wrong it must always better to try and avoid occupational risk and serious accidents so that you do not find yourself attempting to explain complex and emotional issues in a hostile courtroom.
Tell me about COSHH in dozen words?
The control of substances hazardous to health must be the goal of all citizens. Substances of any type, if in excessive concentrations can affect your health and others. Good control methods and awareness of risk can be achieved only if all safety data is known about a given product. Poison can damage your health, we all know that, however many substances in large concentrations become poisonous. Are you sure that you know and recognise all the substances that you work with are harmless. Without a COSHH assessment you will never know, until it is too late maybe?
What is this six pack I often hear about?
The "Six Pack" is a set of general workplace regulations. Most people consider them to be a European inspired set of workplace directives. They are in fact what we in the Uk consider to be our interpretation of the pan Europe harmonisation of workplace Health And Safety Law.
The set of six booklets cover regulatory aspects including the Provision and safe use of work Equipment. The management Of health And safety In the Workplace, The manual Handling Regulations, The Display Screen Regulations and The Workplace
Many people talk about the "Six Pack" as though it was the only set of new regulations in the workplace however it must be stressed that all industries and commercial undertakings will have codes of practice and regulations that may only apply to specific safety related work tasks. It therefore most important that the employer and safety representatives of a company acquire the most recent publications regarding health and safety issues. The rules and control methods sometimes change without much reporting in the trade press and it can be very easy to be ignorant of new rules but the law does not allow ignorance of the regulations to be used as a defence in court. The committed company will always have a regular meeting from time to time for all work persons to put forward ideas and consider new law and how it will be implemented in your workplace. If we all try to gradually integrate good working methods that reduce accidents and the incidence of ill health the benefits will spread across the whole spectrum of society.
Remember that good health and safety in the workplace is not the obligation of the individual employer or work person it obliges everybody to cooperate and contribute to an improving work environment that should be free from risk and bad practice.
This page is sponsored by Professional Health and Safety Consultants Ltd. Phone Internationally: +44 2087787838 or UK London 020 8778 7838 for all your health and safety requirements.