Dean Howells Essential Safety, Health & Safety Blog

New Asbestos Regulations - Posted 22nd May 2012

From 6^th April the new Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012  replaced the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006.

The new Regulations mean that more work involving asbestos will attract the requirement for medical examinations, notification and records. For many employers, the new Regulations will have very little, if any, impact upon their duties to manage asbestos.

However, for businesses in control of premises containing Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM’s), or those working with them, the main changes are:

• There will now be three categories of asbestos work:
  1. Non- Licensable Work – Work that is infrequent, low intensity, and is either short or non-continuous maintenance work involving materials in which the asbestos fibres are firmly bonded within the material (i.e. asbestos cement products)
  2. Notifiable Non-Licensable Work (NNLW) – Minor maintenance work or removal of some ACM's such as asbestos insulation board, longer periods of work involving asbestos cement, or the removal of substantially degraded asbestos cement.
  3. Licensed Work – Work which is frequent, high intensity or work where the control limit could be exceeded
• Employers carrying out NNLW will be required to notify the HSE of that work, and ensure that workers have medical examinations every three years.
• There is a planned three year transition period to 30^th April 2015 before the requirement for workers carrying out NNLW to have medical examinations, allowing employers time to put suitable arrangements in place.

Essential

 

Competency Criteria for Fire Risk Assessors - Posted 25th April 2012

A document has now been released witch outlines the criteria for assessing the competence of fire risk assessors. The document sets out broad criteria for fire risk assessors of “simple buildings” – where the fire risk assessor might be an employee of the occupier – and “complex buildings”, which will require higher levels of knowledge, understanding and experience on the part of the fire risk assessor.

Under the criteria most fire risk assessors would need to be able to demonstrate:

• Evidence of specialist training and experience, or
• Membership of a professional body, or
• Certification by a third party certification body.

 To satisfy the criteria they have appropriate knowledge of:

• The assessment of risk from fire
• Applicable legislation
• Appropriate guidance
• Behaviour of fire in premises
• Effects of fire on people and behaviour of people in fire situations
• Means of escape
• Fire prevention
• Fire protection
• Management of fire safety

We welcome this direction of travel regarding the competency of fire risk assessors, which should assist organisations to check that they are appointing the correct person for their premises.

Essential

Changes to RIDDOR Reporting Requirements - Posted 10th April 2012

From the 6^th of April the requirements to report some injuries in accordance with the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR) are changing.

The main change relates to the period that employees are unable to carry out their normal work duties as a result of an accident at work to be reportable, which is extended from the previous 3 days to 7 days. Inevitably, this will result in a reduced reporting requirement for many employees.

However, it is important to note that “over 3 day” injuries must still be recorded as such. A simple note within your Accident Book will suffice.

It is also worth remembering that only fatalities and major injuries are now reportable to the Incident Contact Centre by telephone on 0845 300 9923 (Monday to Friday 8.30 am to 5 pm).

All other reportable injuries & incidents are now only reportable via the online system at http://www.hse.gov.uk/riddor/online.htm

The Occupational Safety and Health Consultants Register (OSHCR) - Posted 29th February 2012

The OSHCR is a register of consultants who can offer general advice to UK businesses to help them manage health and safety risks. It is free to search for consultants and you can search either in your geographical area or for a type of industry. 

Consultants who are on the register will have a status recognised by the professional participating bodies of the scheme, for example the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) and National Examination Board in Occupational Safety and Health (NEBOSH). A full list is available here:  http://www.oshcr.org/Page/AboutOSHCR

 This minimum standard has been set at a degree level qualification, at least two years experience and active engagement in a continuing professional development scheme. 

This is one of the steps recommended in the Government Report, Common Sense, Common Safety, ie. to professionalise Health and Safety consultants.

Essential

Essential Safety and Fire have a new Facebook Page - Posted 26th January 2012

We have a new Facebook Business Page - Essential Safety and Fire.

Please take a look and possibly even "Like" us?

Essential

Professor Löfstedt’s Health & Safety Report, Part 4 - Posted 20th January 2012

This is our final piece on  Professor Löfstedt’s report to Goverment, which covers the remaining key issues.

That HSE should review all its ACoPs.

Given that resources at the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) have been dramatically reduced recently, this seems a very tall order indeed.

Whilst some Approved Codes of Practice (ACoPs) provided by the HSE are difficult to interpret, the majority are an invaluable point of reference and interpretation of the relevant statutory requirements.

What’s more, they are currently free to download from the HSE Books website. We just hope that this review isn’t funded by making these important documents expensive to obtain.

 That HSE undertakes a programme of sector-specific consolidations to be completed by April 2015.

This recommendation could lead to the consolidation of a number of regulations relating to specific industries, such as mining or petroleum.

 That the original intention of the pre-action protocol standard disclosure list is clarified and restated.

This recommendation could have a significant effect upon the perceived “compensation culture” in the UK and the expectation of financial recompense for any loss or injury suffered.

We expect changes to the protocols for civil claims procedures to make it more likely for insurance companies to challenge claims, thus reducing the quantity and amounts of pay-outs in the future.

 Exempting from health and safety law those self-employed whose work activities pose no potential risk of harm to others.

We await with interest the Government’s interpretation of work activities which pose no potential risk of harm to others.

Apart from homeworkers, working within their own home, can we really say that the activities of the self employed have no potential to cause harm to other persons?

If they drive as part of their work, or work in premises where other persons are present, or supply goods and services to other persons, then surely there is a reasonably foreseeable risk to those persons?

 Essential

Professor Lofstedt's Health and Safety Reform, our comments continued...- Posted 4th January 2012

Out thoughts on Professor Löfstedt’s comments on Portable Appliance Testing and Working at Height recommendations in his recent report to Government:

The requirement for portable appliance testing should be further clarified by April 2012 to stop over-compliance.

At last! We have been suggesting for some time now that, as a society, we have become over-reliant on Portable Appliance Testing (PAT) when it comes to assessing the safety of portable electrical equipment.

The fact is that the majority of defects on electrical equipment can be detected by a simple visual inspection.

We welcome clarification regarding PAT, which will save most businesses time and money. 

The Work at Height Regulations 2005 and the associated guidance should be reviewed by April 2013 to ensure that they do not lead to people going beyond what is either proportionate or beyond what the legislation was originally intended to cover.

A good example of EU recommendations being “gold plated” during implementation in the UK, which have resulted in widespread mis-interpretation. (e.g ladders and stepladders being banned by some organisations).

Whilst we accept that falls from height continue to be one of the biggest causes of serious injuries and fatalities at work, we welcome a review of the Work at Height Regulations, and clarification of “reasonably practicable” in this area.

Essential

Summary of Professor Löfstedt’s Recent Report: Part 2 - Posted 12th Decembe 2011

We are continuing with our summary of the main recommendations from Professor Löfstedt’s recent report to Government entitled: “Reclaiming health and safety for all: An independent review of health and safety legislation”.  Following the report, The Government has announced plans to begin a major cut back of health and safety red tape as early as January next year. Of course, much of the detail regarding implementation of these recommendations is still to be finalised, but these are our views, based on information currently available.

The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 (CDM) and the associated ACoP evaluation should be completed by April 2012 to ensure there is a clearer expression of duties, a reduction of bureaucracy and appropriate guidance for small projects.

This recommendation appears to be based around two main issues:

1/ The seemingly endless number of safety pre-qualification schemes within the construction industry and,

2/ The perception that CDM places an unnecessary bureaucratic burden on small and medium construction sites.

We expect to see a “slimming down” of pre-qualification schemes and a reduction of the paperwork required to comply with CDM.

Essential

British Injuries Fall But Fatalities Rise - Posted 3rd November 2011

The HSE yesterday released figures showing the ongoing trend has continued for the decrease in injuries and people being made unwell at work. However there is a rise in fatalities from 147 to 171. Construction and agriculture are the most dangerous work environments.

"The statistics published by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) show that in Britain between April 2010 and March 2011:

• 24,726 major injuries were reported, such as amputations, fractures and burns, to employees - a rate of 99 injuries per 100,000 workers - compared with 26,268 in 2009/10.
• 90,653 other injuries serious enough to keep people off work for four or more days were reported - a rate of 363.1 injuries per 100,000 workers - down from 96,427 the previous year.
• An estimated 1.2 million people said they were suffering from an illness caused or made worse by their work, down from 1.3 million in 2009/10. Of these, 500,000 were new illnesses occurring in-year.
• 171 workers fatally injured - up from 147 the previous year."

Essential

 

HSE to Recover Costs from Non Compliant Organisations - Posted 22nd Sept 2011

The HSE have announced their intention to recover costs when there has been a breach of health and safety law which requires them to make a formal intervention. Under the proposals currently out for consultation, the HSE will charge for its time at a rate of £133 per hour, plus the costs of any specialists it considers necessary – all payable within 30 days.

Clearly, the total costs of a significant breach could be considerable, particularly if the breach is associated with an incident which led to serious injury – or worse.

The estimated average costs, which could be introduced as early as April 2012, to be charged to the duty holder by the HSE are:

Inspection which results in a letter - £750

Inspection which results in an Enforcement Notice - £1,500

Investigations - £750 to £00,000s

Essential Comment:

Given the financial pressure that all government departments are under, cost recovery by the HSE was always going to be a possibility. And it may not end there. The current proposals do not include cost recovery by Local Authorities carrying out equivalent work but we would not be surprised if this were included as a result of the current consultation, or at some point in the future.

And there are also suggestions that fire and rescue authorities in England and Wales could be handed the power to demand cash for attending false fire alarms.

We have always suggested that safety and profit are not mutually exclusive, and these latest proposals only confirm that view. As the HSE (and possibly Local Authorities) moves to a less pro-active, more punitive approach, it will become even more important that organisations manage health & safety effectively.