| Welcome to the October 2007 edition of the Mesh Consultants Safety Matters email newsletter.
This newsletter is available on free subscription only and is our way of keeping you informed about developments in Health and Safety. To review or amend your subscription details, please see the notes at the end.
In this issue:
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has warned employers about the debilitating effects of dermatitis
Ban bullying at work day announced
Constant change in the workplace is having a negative impact on employees' health, according to research by the Chartered Management Institute (CMI)
A third of construction refurbishment sites inspected are putting the lives of workers at risk, the HSE has revealed
Co-op fined for safety failings
Fears voiced over fire self-assessments
HSE warns against inadequate supervision of children after school proprietor sentenced
Accident prompts HSE machinery warning
HSE puts health and safety into print
Local authority fined £18,000 over asbestos
Disregard to worker safety leaves boss in prison
Poor management of workplace transport leads to £115,000 fine
Offal tank death leads to £700,000 in fine and costs
Are your company's safety systems up to scratch or are you risking prosecution? At MESH we have extensive experience of helping companies to improve their health and safety and in many cases improve their competitiveness.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has warned employers about the debilitating effects of dermatitis
Dermatitis is a painful skin condition that occurs when the protective layer of the skin is broken, leading to redness, irritation, cracking and blistering. The HSE estimates that dermatitis costs the catering sector up to £20 million every year, even though the cost of control measures to prevent the disease amounts to less than 1 per cent of the average restaurant meal.
Employers are required by law to control exposure to materials in the workplace that cause ill-health like dermatitis and the HSE recommends the following simple steps for preventing the condition:
- Avoid contact with cleaning products, water and food where this is possible and sensible i.e. use a dishwasher rather than washing-up;
- Protect the skin by wearing non-latex gloves where possible and particularly when cleaning;
- Check for early signs of dermatitis: itchy, dry or red skin on the hands.
The HSE are concerned that many workers suffer from some degree of dermatitis as a result of substances they have come into contact with at work and the truth is that in addition to costing them their careers the painful symptoms then go on to affect and disrupt other aspects of their life.
Back to top
Ban bullying at work day announced
This year's Ban Bullying at Work Day will take place on November 7. According to the campaigners, more than 2 million people are bullied at work in the UK today and workplace bullying is now a major cause of stress-related illness.
The campaign is being spear-headed by the Andrea Adams Trust - the world's first, not-for-profit charity dedicated to tackling workplace bullying.
The Health and Safety Executive is encouraging organisations to take part in the campaign as part of its wider stress programme.
Further details on this year's event, which will focus on providing opportunities for organisations and individuals to speak out against bullying, are available from: www.banbullyingatwork.com
Back to top
Constant change in the workplace is having a negative impact on employees' health, according to research by the Chartered Management Institute (CMI)
Figures published by the CMI revealed that 89 per cent of managers had experienced organisational change in the past few months. However, the study also shows that many employers are failing to address the negative impact that change can have on employees.
Sixty per cent of firms that had undergone organisational change reported an increase in illness rates while 58 per cent of employees admitted to being unproductive for at least one day each week as a result of change. Just 17 per cent of those questioned believed the changes that had taken place at their organisation had increased productivity and profitability.
The CMI are warning businesses that the health of UK workplaces needs greater attention. With such high levels of illness being experienced, organisations and individuals must act to maintain their competitive edge. Failure to do so will lead to disruption because health clearly has an impact on performance, productivity and, ultimately, the bottom line.
Is change an issue in your organisation? Have you given thought to the effects on your staff and their health and stress levels? At MESH we have experience in helping managers and staff to manage the stresses caused by change; why not contact us for a no obligation discussion?
Back to top
A third of construction refurbishment sites inspected are putting the lives of workers at risk, the HSE has revealed
As part of its rolling inspection programme the HSE visited 1,500 sites, resulting in enforcement action on 426 occasions in just eight weeks.
HSE head of construction Stephen Williams said: "We stopped work on site immediately during 244 inspections because we felt there was a real possibility that life would be lost or ruined through serious injury. It is completely unacceptable that so many lives have been put at risk. Our inspectors were appalled at the apparent willingness to ignore basic safety precautions.
"The simple fact is that despite knowing what they should be doing, too many people are prepared to allow bad practices to continue, even though last year 39 people died on refurbishment, repair and maintenance sites."
Back to top
Co-op fined for safety failings
The supermarket chain The Co-op Group has been fined £250,000 after safety inspectors found that 38 of the firm's 41 stores in East Sussex were not compliant with fire-safety standards.
Inspectors from East Sussex Fire and Rescue carried out a programme of assessments following a complaint from a member of the public regarding fire-safety provision at a Co-op store in St Leonard’s. Among the breaches identified by inspectors were obstructed or locked fire exits, fire doors that were wedged open and a lack of effective fire alarms.
The firm admitted 13 fire-safety-related offences.
In a statement, The Co-op Group expressed regret regarding the breaches and said that it had implemented measures designed to ensure compliance in the future.
Back to top
Fears voiced over fire self-assessments
A BBC undercover investigation into fire safety standards at 14 hotels has led to fire safety consultants questioning whether hotel owners are suitably qualified to conduct their own fire risk assessments.
During the undercover operation thirteen of the properties investigated were judged to be "unsatisfactory" with failings including blocked escape routes, fire doors left open and fire-exit signs pointing the wrong way.
Under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order, introduced last October, the onus is now on business owners to carry out or commission their own fire risk assessments.
The investigations highlight the problems in the change in legislation which requires the managers to be in charge of fire safety. In many buildings fire safety is too complex for the managers to understand and requires expert input. Carrying out assessments with too little knowledge can be asking for trouble.
Are you struggling with the complexities of undertaking fire risk assessment and complying with the new fire safety regulations? If you need professional advice and are not sure of whom to turn to, why not look at some of the organisations that MESH have assisted.
Back to top
HSE warns against inadequate supervision of children after school proprietor sentenced
The HSE is urging those responsible for the care of young children to ensure sufficient levels of supervision are in place, after the proprietor of a North Wales school was sentenced for an offence under health and safety law.
James Porter, proprietor of Hillgrove School in Bangor, Gwynedd, was fined £12,500 and ordered to pay £7,500 costs at Mold Crown Court. He had been found guilty by a jury of breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, after a trial in late July 2007.
A three-year-old died in hospital just over a month after falling down steps at the school in July 2004. The HSE’s investigation into the Childs death identified shortfalls in the levels of supervision for pre-school aged children at the school, which resulted in the child being able to enter an area which was off limits.
On the day of the incident there was one member of staff supervising 59 pupils with an age range of three to eleven. This was well out of line with accepted ratios found elsewhere. It was not possible for the teacher on duty that day to see all parts of the split-level playground. Some areas were simply out of sight.
The HSE commented that this case is not about restricting play for children at school, nor should head teachers be concerned that this case means they will face enforcement action as a result of everyday incidents which often happen to children.
Mr Porter was prosecuted because, as proprietor for the school, he was also the employer and as such had primary responsible for health and safety matters.
Back to top
Accident prompts HSE machinery warning
UK employers have been urged to ensure that all of their machinery is risk-assessed and that adequate safety guards are in place after a London engineering firm was fined £3,500 for failings that led to an employee sustaining serious injuries to his hand while operating a sheet-metal rolling machine.
The worker was operating the machine in January 2006 when his leather glove became trapped in the machine's rollers and his hand was pulled into the machine; he lost the tip of his little finger and suffered lacerations to his hand.
DMD Electronic Engineering Ltd of Enfield, was found guilty this month of breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act etc 1974 and Regulation 3(1)(a) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.
HSE investigations found that the machine did not have any guards covering the 18 sets of rollers, which created crushing and trapping hazards, or the bars which protruded from the side of the machine posing an entanglement risk. The company had not undertaken a risk-assessment of the machine, which would have highlighted the exposed rollers.
The HSE commented that risk assessment is a fundamental and longstanding part of health and safety legislation and a lesson should be learned that complacency in this area can result in extremely serious results.
Back to top
HSE puts health and safety into print
The HSE are targeting the high concentration of print specialists in the Yorkshire and Humber region, with an intensive inspection campaign starting next month in Leeds, Wakefield and York.
The campaign has been launched because nationally there are around 1,200 accidents in the printing industry each year, 200 of which result in major injuries like fractures and amputations.
Letters are going out now to more than 120 of the region's small printing firms to put them on alert.
Print workers are exposed to a range of hazards during their work, ranging from machinery to chemicals. From the beginning of September, HSE inspectors have been focusing their attention on some of the most common causes of accidents and ill health in the industry - manual handling, slips and trips, contact with machinery and dermatitis.
The HSE have commented that the printing industry is one of the UK's largest and HSE has been working closely with it in recent years, with some success, to help reduce its record of work-related injuries and ill health. The campaign is to make sure the necessary high standards are being met.
The print industry may not appear to be a high risk industry but it does rely on the use of hazardous chemicals and complex machinery which, if safety is not kept to the forefront, can put workers at risk of injury or ill health.
The HSE identify that precautions are often simple to implement so they will continue to work at implementing good health and safety practice whilst, via initiatives like this, will take enforcement action against those that fail to meet their legal responsibilities to provide healthy and safe work places.
Does your workplace carry similar hazards and do you have suitable risk assessments and systems in place to manage health and safety risks? If you require competent advice and support then why not contact us for a no obligations discussion.
Back to top
Local authority fined £18,000 over asbestos
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is warning duty holders to ensure they take proper precautions when working in buildings where asbestos may be present. The warning follows an investigation at Woodhouse Close Leisure Complex in Bishop Auckland, County Durham.
Wear Valley District Council was fined £18,000 at Darlington Magistrates Court after admitting six offences under the Control of Asbestos at Work Regulations 2002. It was also ordered to pay £7,722 costs.
The investigation followed a complaint in January 2006 by a maintenance worker, who discovered that the plant room of the council-run leisure centre where he had worked for many years contained asbestos.
HM Inspector of Health and Safety, Richard Bishop, said: "A survey had been carried out in 2001 which identified asbestos containing materials. This information was not acted upon and no-one who worked in the plant room was made aware. As a result, work that was liable to disturb the asbestos was done without the necessary precautions required by law to protect their health from exposure. "
With up to 4,000 deaths per year - that’s around 15 times the current rate of fatal accidents at work - asbestos-related diseases are the largest occupational killers in the UK. There is still a legacy of asbestos in buildings that needs addressing. It is estimated that some half a million non-domestic premises contain asbestos of some type. And this means there are still workers putting themselves at risk every day.
Recent studies estimate that a quarter of those dying from an asbestos-related disease worked as electricians, plumbers, maintenance workers or builders.
Where asbestos has been found to be present in buildings, the risk it presents must be evaluated and written plans devised and implemented that specify the steps necessary to address the risk. All work liable to expose people to asbestos must be carefully planned and assessed, with appropriate precautions taken to prevent or reduce exposure and the spread of asbestos.
Back to top
Disregard to worker safety leaves boss in prison
A businessman has been jailed for 6 months after a casual labourer narrowly avoided death on a building site.
The Slovakian worker was working on his own to demolish a wall when he was struck by a concrete lintel; the injuries sustained were thought not to be survivable. He has now returned to his home country and is in need of constant care and will probably never work again.
It was found that at the site there was no proper scaffolding in place and the worker had been using an improvised working platform; he had no protective clothing nor had he received any training.
The judge in sentencing determined that the businessman had decided to have the work done as cheaply as possible and had callous disregard for the safety of the workers.
As well as the prison sentence he was ordered to pay £90,000 in compensation, payable within 6 months. He intends to appeal.
Back to top
Poor management of workplace transport leads to £115,000 fine
Two companies involved in the poor management of workplace transport that led to a security guard sustaining serious injuries were heavily fined.
The guard was struck by a car leaving the premises of the packaging company; he had been checking on a HGV leaving the site when the incident occurred. It was found that the system of work in place for such activities did not make proper arrangements for controlling the sequencing of traffic on and off the site.
Changes had also been made to the way that HGVs entered and exited the site and this had not been properly risk assessed. The guard was also inadequately trained and poorly equipped to do his job; he did not high visibility clothing or a torch.
Both the packaging company and the security company were found guilty and collectively fined £115,000 with an additional £18,500 in costs.
Have you considered workplace transport in your risk assessments and do you have suitable procedures for managing workplace transport? If you require competent advice and support then why not contact us for a no obligation discussion?
Back to top
Offal tank death leads to £700,000 in fine and costs
The company were fined following the death of a worker at its Staffordshire premises in 2004. The company have been fined £620,000 and ordered to pay costs of £80,000.
The accident occurred after an animal carcass rendering machine became blocked and in an attempt to unblock it the worker was lowered into a deep and narrow part of the machinery on the sling of a crane, which hung from the ceiling.
Overcome by fumes he fell into the offal tank; an electrician then entered the tank by the same means to try to rescue him when he also became overcome by the fumes and fell into the tank. Both were subsequently rescued by the Fire Service, the first survived but the second died.
The company pleaded guilt to offences of health and safety breaches to s2 and s33 of the HSWA, failure to risk assess under the MHSWR, failing to provide safe systems of work or suitable and sufficient rescue arrangements under the Confined Space Regulations.
The company accepted at the time that it had failed to meet the required standards but in defence had since implemented a £4 million programme of investment in health and safety.
Back to top
Thank you for reading this edition of our email newsletter. Please do feel free to pass it onto colleagues, who can also subscribe for free via our web site.
All information supplied to us in order for you to receive our newsletters is protected by our privacy policy.
If you would like to send feedback or ask us anything at all about health and safety, please do contact us. We are always happy to give no-obligation advice.
If you no longer wish to receive this newsletter please just reply to this email with UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject line.
|
|
