Getting Tough On Safety

Comment by Geoff Hooke, secretary general at the British Safety Industry Federation

There is a natural tendency during a recession to try to save costs by carefully evaluating every aspect of activity so that non-essential spending can be eliminated. The British Safety Industry Federation (BSIF), like every other responsible safety industry organization, is urging companies to make a positive decision not to compromise on health and safety in an attempt to save a few pounds.

While the new Health and Safety (Offences) Act was passed last year and has just come into force, the costs, downtime, disruption and increased insurance premiums associated with accidents and injuries should be incentive enough to ensure adequate attention to health and safety without the increased threat of higher fines and the possibility of custodial sentences. Nevertheless, if this more robust regime strengthens the attention of company directors towards the welfare of their workers, it has the full support of the BSIF.

Facing the facts

The current economic climate has created a significant downturn in the construction sector and related industries. The latest figures from the Office for National Statistics¹ identify that construction orders have diminished by 15% and orders in the private housing sector are down by 33%. These financial pressures are forcing economies, redundancies and temporary closures of quarries because there is insufficient demand. Nevertheless, it is vital that there is no reduction in attention to health and safety for those still working in these potentially dangerous environments.

Health and Safety Executive statistics² identify quarrying and mining as one of the most dangerous sectors in respect of major injuries. The most commonly reported injuries in this sector are caused by slips and trips, and manual handling which, last year, accounted for 30% and 32%, respectively, of all reported injuries. Another disturbing statistic is that the number of days lost per employee within mining and quarrying was 0.57 compared with a national average of 0.23.

Assessing the risks

Risk assessment is a crucial step in protecting employees and the most vital aspect of this is to identify and prioritize those hazards which could seriously affect the health and safety of workplace personnel and potentially cause real harm or injury. What is not often realized is that whatever external advice and guidance is sought, and however an employee might contribute to an accident, the responsibility clearly rests with the company which owns the site (CDM regulations) and the employer (Health and Safety at Work regulations). These responsibilities cannot be delegated and the courts will not accept pleas of mitigation.

While it is a legal requirement for companies to carry out a risk assessment, the process does not need to be onerous. Everyone, including HSE inspectors, simply expect that all significant hazards are identified and that ‘reasonably practicable’ steps are taken to minimize the risks generated. Ideally, this is achieved by engineering out the hazard but in the case of quarries, with movements of large vehicles, the potential for fly-rock, and ever-present dust (affecting visibility and breathing), most sites will need to ensure that their operating procedures minimize the hazards.

Even with comprehensive operating procedures and effective management to ensure that staff comply, eliminating all the hazards present in quarries is not likely to be viable or economic and it will probably be necessary to deploy personal protective equipment (PPE) and other specialist safety equipment. This will bring with it additional responsibilities as it will be vital to ensure that staff are aware of what the PPE will do, how to wear and use it, how to maintain it and its limitations.

Selecting the right equipment

The regulations make it clear that responsibility for selecting suitable PPE and safety equipment rests with the employer. A ‘tip of the iceberg’ research carried out by BOMEL³ showed that over a 10-year period, 63% of RIDDOR reports which specifically mentioned PPE, were as a result of the deployment of unsuitable PPE, poor maintenance and inadequate training. Interestingly, not one of these reports stated that the PPE had failed to perform as stated. Another more recent research identified that many managers responsible for staff safety, including some safety specialists, did not know what the various markings on safety products, including the CE Mark, actually meant.

It is important that there is an understanding that the CE Mark only verifies that the PPE ‘does what it says on the tin’. It does not confirm that the product will do what you want it to do. Therefore, it is back to the risk assessment, which will identify the hazards. Any BSIF manufacturer or safety distributor will be able to match these hazards to an appropriate and suitable product (look for the BSIF members’ company logo). Any safety manager should be able to do this anyway as all PPE will carry details of the standards and classes against which these products have been tested to gain their right to use the CE Marks. It is then a simple matter of matching the product performances against the hazards identified. All PPE must have user information available at the point of sale or with the product. A little time spent in reading it will provide a wealth of relevant information.

Because of this general lack of awareness of how to ‘read’ what equipment will do, there have been many recorded incidents. One safety officer issued half-mask respirators with vapour filters to protect against a dusty environment. A lack of knowledge and attention to detail, the adoption of a ‘trial and error’ approach or a selection process based purely on cost are all totally irresponsible. Any penalties imposed by the courts when these bad practices come to light are fully deserved. Unfortunately, this is often to the detriment of someone whose life will never be the same again, as injuries in quarries are likely to be more serious than in less-dangerous working environments.

Need some assistance?

The BSIF is the lead association for PPE Regulation in the UK (as appointed by BERR) and has been designated as a Competent Authority by the HSE. The Federation is a broad-based organization whose members have specific and specialist skills across the supply side of the safety industry, from safety consultants and trainers to manufacturers and suppliers of PPE and safety equipment. Anyone who is experiencing difficulties with risk assessments, selection of PPE and safety equipment can contact the BSIF HelpDesk on tel: (01745) 585600 or visit: www.bsif.co.uk. Both services are free and will seek to signpost organizations that will be able to assist.

References

1. Office for National Statistics, October 2008. In the long term in the UK, forecasts indicate that the industry is expected to expand, due to high-value projects such as the Olympic Park and the Thames Gateway redevelopment, and continued public sector investment in services and facilities such as roads, schools and hospitals.
2. HSE statistics (www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/hssoct08.htm).
3. (www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr419.pdf)