1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140 
8. The impact of legislation on small companies
Page 88
Page 89
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
/HEN far-reaching industrial :gislation is introduced there is natural tendency for small emloyers to assume that onerous e les arid working practices pply wholly or mainly to big Dmpanies. When plating and asting -laws came in thousands f lorry operators took much onvinding that the regulations pplied just as much to the small ehicle operator as to the large.
It is true that in the matter f health and safety at work the rrge firm has the advantage • that it is in a position Ito fford to employ a personnel ianager and, quite possibly, a till-time safety officer. If there 3 a functional, specialist, mane:er charged with ensuring that deity rules are obeyed then . company managing director night be forgiven for thinking hat if there are any transgresions, the man to blame is the [racialist who is paid to superrise the function.
In fact, of course, no single nanager, or even a deparltment :oncerned solely with health and safety, can be effective unless ill the managers and supervisors lown the line play their allotted noles 'in ensuring that everything easonably possible 'is done to )romote the health and safety of ..mployees and to minimise risk :o any third parties who are not iirectly employed.
Prosecution
The British Safety Council has receetly issued a warning that even futheime safety officers may ne liable to prosecution if their company is prosecuted for failing to comply with the UK's stringent new safety laws. The Council fears that unless safety management becomes a full-time profession as opposed to a parttime activity, many people made responsible for safety may be tempted to ingratiate themselves with their 'bosses or face dismissal 'because they want to give safety the attention it deserves.
Of course, in a fragmented industry like road transport, there is no possibility that the small firm will be able to justify the employment of a safety officer. Inevitably, the safety function will have to be assumed by a named individual, and this person will be wise to ensure that all supervisory and management staff obey any rules introduced in the particular firm and any industry-wide codes of practice laid down.
In 1973 the Factories Inspectorate initiated roughly 150 prosecultions per month. Under the new law, encompassing all previous safety art work legislation, improvement and prohibition notices—neglect of which could lead to a prosecution—may be served for contraventions of both the new Health and Safety at Work Act and the Factories Acts and regulations made under either of these Acts.
As an example of the risks faced by employers who do not take the new health and safety law seriously it may be useful to quote recent figures for the issue of notices. In January there were 77 in total, in February 155 and in March 437; a total of 669 in three months. Of the total, 407 were classified as improvement, and 262 prohibition notices were issued. More inspectors are being appointed, so the tally of notices issued may increase still further.
Bigger fines
The powers given to inspectors under the new law to 'issue netices are intended as an alternative to prosecutions, but 'the power to prosecute is held in reserve—either as an alternative or in addition to the issue of notices. The chairman of the Health and Safety Commission, Mr Bill Simpson, noted in a recent speech that the average fine imposed upon employers for safety offences in 1973 was £106 and he hinted that such fines might be too low.
Said Mr Simpson : "It devalues the work of inspectors, employers, trade unions, researchers, policy makers and Parliament if, on conviction, safety miscreants are fined piddling amounts, that have more in common with a dog fouling the pavement than with the breaking of the law of the land by employers, which can result in killing or maiming of workers. So in one sense preventing future accidents does need a vigorous enforcement Of the law. Heavier fines don't prevent accidents that have happened; they do, however, have some deterrent effect and would certainly show that the law was serious in seeing that the provisions were observed."
Two London companies were recently fined £750 and £1,200 respectively for safety offenees, under Factories Acts legislatiom suggested in an earlier article in this series that the new Health and Safety legislation would be likely to have profound effects on labour relations. The attitudes taken by trade unions and shop stewards to -safety wIH surely be at least as decisive as anything undertaken by employers.
I had not artticipated that the legislation itself would provoke dissection in the Health and Safety Commission, the admirestraltive and policy-making body, but it appears the Commission members have been alt odds recently in their interpretation of Section 2(4) of the Act providing for the issue of Regulations by the Secretary of State coveting the appointment "from amongst the employees" of safety representatives who are to represent the employee.
The Section appears to envisage "the appointment in prescribed cases by recognised trade unions (within the meaning of the regulations) of safety representatives . . ." and the argument now turns on whether such representatives should represent all employees whether unionised or not, or merely those employeeswhose terms and conditions of employment are settled by negotiations between the employer and recognised trade unions.
Drivers' position
In many road haulage firms some or all of the drivers may be members of a trade union which may or may not negotiate pay and conditions for drivers. But what is to happen to the many firms with no unionised employees at all ? And in a company where the drivers alone are union members does it make sense for a safety representative of drivers to act on behalf of other grades of employees ?
These questions remain to be settled, and it may be expected that other queries will arise in an Act of over 40,000 words with 117 pages and 85 sections. The final shape of the legislation requires amendments to be made to the Companies Act, since the two Acts dovetail in a number of respects.
One major area of difficulty Will be to separate out the relative responsibility of the Police and Health and Safety Commission inspectors lin road accidents where some or all of the people involved are "at work." HSC Staff must be concerned with safe loading techniques because of the risk to the driver and— equally important—the risk to 'third parties.
If a load falls from a lorry and causes injury to a person or persons "at work" then this type of accident 'is in a different category if those injured are, say, a family going on holiday. It has even been suggested that in particular circumstances a prosecution could be brought under the Health and Safety Act for dangerous driving.
No one can yet say what the precise split of responsibilities Will be between the HSC inspection staff, numbering in total around 1,000 people, and the local authority inspection staff responsible for Offices and Shops Act inspections and, possibly in future, many of the smaller em-, r 'oying firms. There are said to be some .7,000 local authority inspectors, but many are involved only part-time on functions now brought under 'the umbrella legislation of the Health and Safety at Work Act. Since it is known that the number of Com mission inspecting staff is to be increased by 50 per cent, the risk of attradting an improvement or prohibition notice is ever present.
If every company in road transport sets up a safety com mittee, or at least ensures that an employee representative is given liaison responsibilities for safety matters, there should be no risk of an employee writing or telephoning to the local offices of the HSC to complain about safety or 'health risks.
In confidence
I understand that when such complaints are received the local inspector will try to see the complainant privately and—unless he agrees—his name will not be divulged to the employer. So seriously is this matter of confidentiality taken 'that there have been instances of whole factories being checked in order to preserve the anonymity of an informant.
In many small firms it may be expected that the standards of workshop or office premises will fall short of average standards. The attitudes taken by visiting inspectors will be coloured largely by the attitudes of employees, more specifically of the trade unions. It is no part of the inspector's job to put out of business a small company with a cash shortage. Against that, there is no sound reason why a group of enpioyees working in sub-stanlard premises should be expe4ted to do so permanently.
In their exam nation of premises inspectors will be con' cerned with what is termed "the quantum of risk" and they are now supported by much tougher legislation than ever before.
Employers of all sizes tan expect in the foreseeable future to receive details of many training courses for managers, supervisors and safety representatives/shop stewards. One 19-day course for safety officers costs £489 plus VAT! The TUC has just published a 25p Guide of Health and Safety at Work which is most informative.
The Road Transport Industry Training Board has produced some excellent guidelines for member_ firms who are— or should be—devising a company safety polity. The guidelines stress the need to define the general policy toward safety; the safety organisation within the company; and the arrangements and procedures for carrying out the policy. While the duty to provide a safety policy relates only to employees, the Board points out that the presence of contractors, customers or other employer's drivers suggests some control rules to cover non-employed staff.
• The practical difficulties of ensuring safe operations in road transport, where many accidents occur or originate outside the company's own premises and outside its immediate control, need no emphasis. The RI ml suggests that "circumspection is required about making safety objectives which may not be achievable " but a rule on the following lines may be desir able: "Drivers collectim vehicles or containers alreack loaded from customer's premise. or docks are responsible for en suring that the laden vehicle. comply with all relevant row traffic regulations before enter ing upon public roads. If ii doubt they should have their vehicles weighed and/or tele phone their depots for instruc tions."
What is safety ?
The RTITB guidelines sugges that 'the term " safety " ma3 need defining for employees The Board thinks the tern safety could cover: personal in juries; all types of vehicle acci dents, whether or not casualitie: occur; all types of accidents causing damage to property equipment or freight; occupa, Ilona! health and hygiene; th( safety of passengers; the safety of customers and their property, the investigation of all situation: irk which there was actual ok potential risk to life in the carriage of hazardous cargoes, for example); fire prevention and control.
The RTITIVs guidelines cover safety organisation—the nomina tion of a director or senior manager to be responsible for safety as part of his management funttion—and related questions such as the use of job descriptions to identify safety responsibilities and targets, consultation with employees and adequate induction training for new staff.
On the methods for monitoring safety performance the guidelines suggest various ways, eg; by the ratio of injuries to number of employees; by the ratio of injuries to hours worked; by the ratio of vehicle accidents to miles run; by the ratio of vehicle accidents to trips or road tests made; by Straightforward costing. In small companies techniques such as hazard spotting or safety sampling are urged.
Companies should lay down procedures for fire drills, staff training and maintenance of firefighting equipment. The arrangements for dealing with major incidents, such as a mishap involving a hazardous cargo or the breakdown of a vehicle carrying a load with a time limitation, ie perishables, should also be defined.
• Companies 'involved with waste disposal will have been made fully aware of the many new statutoax duties imposed on them. It i likely to be only a matter of time before vehicle marking regkpations 'apply in this sector, Its with accepted hazardous load identification.
Next week : Summing up the series.