3. The responsibilities of employers
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
MASSIVE area of legislation, ne relatively new and much it going back for decades, is dually to be phased out and rerseded by the Health and F.ety at Work etc Act. This is
" enabling " measure giving Secretary of State for Emiyment power to regulate tually the whole of industry d commerce — but not agrilture — in so far as it is cessary to do so to ensure the fety, health and well-being of iployees and third parties who ay be affected by employment actices.
Rome was not built in a day d no magic change in work tterns came about in Britain April 1, 1975 when the major itures of the new Act were erating. Employers have many her responsibilities besides e health, safety and welfare of eir workers but the new teeth ven to the inspectorate of the :alth and Safety Executive ean that deliberately un-coierative employers will land Lemselves in great difficulty. uite apart from anything offialdom may do—and the penales range from a £400 maximum le on summary conviction for Lost offences to an unlimited ne, and up to two years imrisonment, for prosecution on ictictment—employees may be xpected to become increasingly afety-conscious. There will be ressure from workers, whether rade unionists or not, for their ompanies to be in the van in ealth and safety matters.
An employer must ensure, "so ar as is reasonably practicable, he health, safety and welfare t work of all his employees." Reasonably practicable" is an Lnfortunate phrase on which awyers and courts have spent nuch time but this is the wordrig of the Act in Clause 2 (1) lefining the general duties of ,mployers.
To understand how compreiensively Parliament expects !mployers to behave in 1975 I vill quote the five' key sentences vhich follow the basic premise quoted above: Clause 2 (2) says: "Without prejudice to the generality of an employer's duty under the preceding sub-section, the matters to which that duty extends include in particular: (a) the provision and maintenance of plant and systems of work that are, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe and without risks to health; (b) arrangements for ensuring, so far as is reasonably practicable, safety and absence of risks to health in connection with the use, handling, storage and transport of articles and substances; (c) the provision of such infor mation, instruction, training and supervision as is necessary to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety at work of his employees; (d) so far as is reasonably practicable as regards any place of work under the employer's control, the maintenance of it in a condition that is safe and without risks to health and the provision and maintenance of means of access and egress from it that are safe and without such risks;
(e) the provision and maintenance of a working environment for hisemployees that is, so far as is reasonably
practicable, safe, without risks to health, and adequate as regards facilities and arrangements for their welfare at work.
Discussion of these broad requirements must await a further article. The elastic phrase " reasonably practicable," repeated in each pronouncement, suggests that industry standards will progressively be tightened up in line with what employers and employees, the public at large and the visiting inspectors of the Health and Safety Executive, consider appropriate.
With the exception of employers of less than five persons, every employer must (Clause 3) "prepare and as often as may be appropriate revise a written statement of his general policy with respect to the health and safety at work of his employees and the organisation and arrangements for the time being in force for carrying out that policy, and to bring the statement and any revision of it to the notice of all of his employees." When regulations have been made, employers will, in specified circumstances, have to allow their employees to appoint their own safety representatives, and, if so requested, to set up safety committees.
Discussing the possible effect of 2 (b) James Jackson, a legal expert, in his book: "Health and Safety—the New Law" (Commercial Publishing Company, £5) suggests that even in circumstances where no regulations have been promulgated, an inspector may mount a prosecution simply alleging that, for example, "the employer has not made all arrangements that were reasonably practicable to ensure absence of risk to health in the transit of a particular substance. Such an allegation will be sufficient to found a case, although no law-maker has ever directed attention to the circumstances in which substances of the sort involved in the prosecution should be carried."
If Jackson is right the trans port industry is in for a lively time!
Large companies and perhaps other companies involved with the manufacture or movement of hazardous products may be affected by Section 79 of the Act which amends Section 16 of the Companies Act, 1967 specifying matters that are to be dealt with in directors' reports. The Secretary of State for Employment now has power to make regulations to require companies of different classes to provide details in a prescribed form "about the arrangements in force for that year for securing the health, safety and welfare at work of employees of the company and its subsidiaries and for protecting other persons against risks to health or safety arising out of or in connection with the activities at work of those employees."
This will be a significant development if the Minister decides to make suitable regulations. The Robens committee declared: "We can think of few things more likely to engage the attention of the chairman and directors of a board than an obligation to furnish regular accounts about how the firm has catered for the safety and health of its employees and with what results." Many companies in fact monitor their safety records in much detail and do not shrink from making details public but less reputable companies, both large and small, would certainly not welcome publication of accident figures showing an adverse trend. Although this aspect may only be mandatory for a minority of all companies it is likely that trade union pressure could compel firms of all sizes to reveal the facts.
Self-employed people do not escape the new health and safety law. They must conduct their business in such a way as to ensure so far as reasonably practicable that other persons are not exposed to risks to their health or safety. Where prescribed, a self-employed person —and, indeed, any employer covered by the Act—must give information about his undertaking to those whose health or safety may be affected by his activities.
Some of the requirements of the Act for employers to maintain all the entrances and exits of premises in safe conditions, walkways and corridors free of obstructions, and floor surfaces safe both. for walkers and vehicles of any description have long been routine matters to works managers in Factory Act premises. However routine the chore of good housekeeping the task cannot be scamped and it must be shouldered by first line supervisors. It does not need to be stressed that many road transport premises, and reception and dispatch bays in factory premises, could be condemned on grounds of safety as much as for general unsuitability for modern road transport operations. In distribution premises increasing attention has been paid in recent years to the training of fork-lift truck drivers. The speed with which fork-trucksand indeed any powered vehicles —move about enclosed premises needs to be carefully watched by management at all times. Productivity schemes for warehousemen that require excessively fast fork-lift operations stand condemned.
The stress laid on keeping exits and entrances clear has a bearing on fire precautions. Section 78 of the Act amends the Fire Precautions Act 1971, so that general fire precautions (means of escape in case of fire, fire alarm systems, fire fighting equipment, etc) at such places of work as are designated by Order can be dealt with under that Act by the Fire Authorities and the Home Office. The Commission and Executive will, however, remain responsible for control over what are termed "process" risks, ie, risks of outbreak of fire associated with particular premises or the use of particular substances.
On the subject of fire risks in general, now of considerable public concern, I suspect that transport and distribution managers do not use enough imagination as to the possible risks of fire hazards.
Quite by chance, on a recent visit to a large distribution activity in the wholesale food trade, the distribution manager who was showing me around found—to his surprise—that a large warehouse was locked during the lunch break and the key was not readily available. Had a fire broken out during the lunch break it would probably have been necessary to break in a door or window to gain access unless the Joe Bloggs with the key had been located quickly. With fire hazards, even a few minutes delay can be fatal. This was a clear example of security of the warehoused foodstuffs taking precedence over common sense fire precautions. Premises locked up during meal breaks are not normally regarded as a fire risk but clearly, those in managerial authority on the premises at any time should carry a master key in case of a need to enter the area concerned in an emergency.
It is anticipated that a designation Order will be made in 1975 applying the Fire Precautions Act to premises previously subject to the Offices, Shops and Railway Premises Act and the Factories Act. The Commission (ie the Health and Safety Commission) will retain responsibility in certain scheduled premises, such as major fire hazard factories, and Regulations for this purpose will be introduced to coincide with the designation Order. The provisions will be in line with those of the Fire Precautions Act.
Fire Certificates issued under the Factories and Offices. Shops and Railway Premises Acts will continue in force as if they had been made under the Fire Precautions Act or the Regulations and as if they also embodied The fire precautions requirements at present contained in the two Acts. They will also be subject to renewal, revision or revocation under the terms of the Fire Precautions Act or the Regulations.
Part III of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act extends the power to make building regulations governing the structure of buildings. This aspect will be the responsibility of the Secretaries of State for the Environment and for Scotland. So far as possible all requirements relating to the structure of new buildings will be made under this extended power. The Act extends the scope of building regulations generally and it rationalises procedures.
Next week: Employers' Policy Statements.