|
|
Welcome to the April 2010 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 …
HSE issues its business plan for the coming year >
Notification of Conventional Tower Cranes Regulations 2010 >
Unions express serious concerns over Conservative health & safety plans >
HSE finds that 1 in 4 construction sites fail safety inspections in March >
HSE issues warning on the safe condition of variable reach trucks >
Failure to safely store flammable liquid results in £40,000 fine >
Contractor prosecuted after sewage works incident >
Unguarded drill accident leads to £40,000 fine >
Rubber company fined after coffee break saves workers life in factory exposion >
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.
HSE issues its business plan for the coming year
|
The HSE has published its latest business plan, which emphasises working within the health and safety system as a whole, and is concerned with the increases in workplace injuries historically associated with economic recovery.
The HSE’s business plan for 2010/11 sets out the main actions that the safety watchdog will take to progress its strategy, “The Health and Safety of Great Britain — Be Part of the Solution”, which was launched in June 2009.
It also outlines the work the HSE intends to do to support others in its shared mission to prevent death, injury and ill health to those at work or those affected by work activities.
The business plan was launched by HSE Chair Judith Hackitt CBE and reports on trends in health and safety statistics. The HSE says its figures indicate that Britain became “a healthier and safer place to work last year, with a significant reduction in the number of people killed, injured or suffering work-related ill health”.
Judith Hackitt said: “While it is encouraging to see these improvements, the number of people who are harmed in workplaces every year still represents a major challenge to us all as well as a huge cost. Protecting people from harm caused by work is a business imperative in any economic climate.”
The HSE Chair predicted that as the economy moves towards recovery and increased activity in some sectors, new hurdles will be faced if last year’s rate of improvement is to be maintained. Historically, moving back into economic growth is associated with an increase in the rate of work-related injuries.
She said: “Preventing history repeating itself is a challenge facing everyone with a stake in health and safety in the workplace — regulators, employers and employees alike.”
Back to top
|
|
|
Notification of Conventional Tower Cranes Regulations 2010 |
The Notification of Conventional Tower Cranes Regulations 2010 (the ‘Regulations’) came into force on 6 April 2010. The Regulations require certain information about conventional tower cranes used on construction sites to be notified to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).
To ensure that those using this type of equipment know what is needed the HSE has produced a leaflet that sets out:
· The types of tower crane that need to be notified to HSE;
· Who needs to ensure notification is made;
· When the notification needs to be made;
· What information needs to be notified; and
· How the information should be notified
This can be downloaded free at http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg437.pdf
Back to top
|
|
Unions express serious concerns over Conservative health & safety plans |
The Conservative plans to allow low risk companies to self regulate on health and safety issues have met the wrath of the unions. The pledge being made by the party are to sweep away what it describes as Labours “bureaucratic inspection regime” and to replace regulator run teams of inspectors with a model closer to financial control and audits.
The Tories are envisaging that “low risk” companies could arrange their own independent audits and if they pass could then refuse HSE inspectors access to their sites. The Tories have identified that the HSE would decide the criteria to be deemed “low risk” and insist the HSE would stil have powers to inspect in the event of an emergency.
The union that represents the HSE inspectors (Prospect) fears that the importance placed upon achieving the right standard of consultants to meet the standards set may likely end up with HSE inspectors being targeted to fill the role.
Other unions have also lambasted the plans as ignorant and stupid; stating the HSE would be prevented from carrying out its primary role to prevent accidents occuring. IOSH also believes the move would be a retrograde step.
Back to top
|
|
HSE finds that 1 in 4 construction sites fail safety inspections in March |
Nearly one in four of the construction sites visited by the HSE during March failed safety checks. Inspectors from HSE carried out checks at 2014 construction sites across Great Britain as part of an intensive inspection campaign aimed at reducing death and injury in one of Britain‘s most dangerous industries.
During unannounced visits, inspectors focused on refurbishment and roofing work to ensure that any work at height was being done safely and that the sites were in good order. 2414 contractors were inspected during the campaign.
A total of 691 enforcement notices were issued at 470 sites, with inspectors giving orders for work to be stopped immediately in 359 instances for either unsafe work being carried out at height or where sites lacked ‘good order’. The majority of all notices issued related to unsafe work being carried out at height.
The HSE have commented that it is encouraging that many small construction firms have got their act together and are giving health and safety the priority it needs, but the fact that its inspectors needed to take enforcement action on almost a quarter of sites, and on a similar proportion of contractors, is a matter of serious concern.
The HSE view is that there are still a small number of employers or contractors who continue to put their own and other people’s health and safety at risk. This is unacceptable and the HSE are making it clear to these operators that they will not hesitate to take action where standards of health and safety are endangering workers lives and livelihoods.
During 2008/09 there were 53 deaths in construction and 11 264 injuries. Last year, inspectors visited 1759 sites, 2145 contractors and issued 491 enforcement notices during a similar month-long initiative.
Would your site pass a HSE inspection or would the likely outcome be the issuing of an Improvement notice or worse? Why not contact MESH as we have assisted a wide range of clients to bring their health & safety systems to a level that would pass a HSE inspection.
Back to top
|
|
HSE issues warning on the safe condition of variable reach trucks |
A fatal accident has prompted a warning that variable reach trucks should not be used if the right-hand side window is missing or broken.
A 36-year-old man was crushed by the descending boom of a telehandler truck after he apparently leant through the broken window aperture. This was the third such death in seven years.
The side window on telehandlers (or variable reach trucks) is designed to prevent operator access to the boom. If the glass screen is broken or missing, operators may be tempted to lean out of the window aperture, for instance to adjust a mirror, and may inadvertently lower the boom on to themselves without being able to stop it.
The Health and Safety Executive has issued a Safety Notice recommending that machines in this condition be removed from use until the window has been replaced, and reminding users of their duty to carry out daily checks of the truck which should include the condition of the cab windows.
Back to top
|
|
Failure to safely store flammable liquid results in £40,000 fine |
A York recycling company has been fined £40,000 for failing to safely store flammable liquid, which was later used in an arson attack.
The Health and Safety Executive launched an investigation into hazardous waste specialist BCB Environmental Management after a former employee started a blaze at the company’s premises in 2008.
The probe found that BCB had stored drums of dangerous chemicals close to unprotected electrical equipment. An unsafe and illegal drum crushing machine, on which the emergency stop button was almost unrecognisable and a vital guard was missing, was also in regular use by the firm.
The company pleaded guilty to multiple breaches of health and safety legislation. Harrogate Magistrates’ Court fined BCB £40,000 and ordered it to pay £6,110 in costs.
The employee was prosecuted for arson at an earlier hearing.
Back to top
|
|
Contractor prosecuted after sewage works incident |
A construction company was recently prosecuted following an incident at a sewage works which saw an employee lose his arm.
Morgan Est plc, a provider of infrastructure services, had been engaged by Yorkshire Water, as the principal contractor on the job, to carry out refurbishment at Neiley Waste Water Treatment Works, in Huddersfield. A new sludge treatment plant had been installed at the works by the firm and was in the process of being commissioned when the accident occurred.
On 12 March 2008, an engineer employed by the Morgan Est plc lost his right arm after coming into contact with a rotating screw conveyor on a newly installed piece of equipment at the waste water treatment works.
The investigation by the HSE found that a fixed guard on a screw conveyor had been removed to allow clearance of a blockage of sludge in the conveyor. The court heard blockages had occurred before, but on previous occasions the machine had been isolated prior to any work being carried out.
The company accepted that it had failed to carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment for the clearing of blockages within the sludge plant during commissioning works and that access to the rotating screw arose because the plant had not been isolated prior to removal of the guard.
Morgan Est plc, of Rugby, Warwickshire, pleaded guilty to breaching regulation 11(1) of PUWER and regulation 3(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999; the company was fined £6000 and ordered to pay costs of £2163.
Back to top
|
|
Unguarded drill accident leads to £40,000 fine |
The fine came after an agency worker at a construction products manufacturer had his arm pulled into an unguarded rotating drill. The worker was using a radial arm drill when his right glove became entangled in the rotating drill bit and his arm was pulled into the drill.
He managed to use his left arm to hit the emergency stop button but his clothing was drawn into the machine to such an extent that he had to be cut free by the emergency services. He sustained two broken bones in his forearm along with serious muscle damage.
Had the drill been guarded to the correct level as is required by the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) then this accident could easily have been prevented.
The HSE have warned that it is not acceptable that this type of accident is still happening. They want companies to understand they must invest sufficient time and effort to ensure risk assessments for work equipment such as radial drills. The assessments must identify what controls are needed including guarding, trip devices, training and supervision.
Do you have suitable and sufficient risk assessments in place for the work equipment used by your staff? If you need assistance to comply with PUWER then MESH can assist; why not look at some of the companies we have worked with.
Back to top
|
Rubber company fined after coffee break saves workers life in factory explosion |
A rubber manufacturer has been fined £10,000 after a Manchester worker narrowly escaped being killed in a factory explosion.
The man was returning from a coffee break when he saw a five-foot iron girder fly through the factory, smashing his workstation into pieces. The father of four, and grandfather of ten, would normally have been at his desk at the time of the explosion but had left it earlier than usual to make a drink.
|
|
|