Updates on new and changing regulations plus best practice in health, safety, quality and environment

Renewables – Solar PV installer prosecuted for health and safety failings by HSE

Solar PV installer prosecuted by Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after worker suffers fractured skull just weeks after being employed

A Yorkshire roofing company has appeared in court for safety failings after a young worker suffered a fractured skull just weeks after being hired.

The worker, who does not wish to be named, was 20 years old and had started his job with Dodds Roofing Services Ltd barely a month before the incident on 29 September 2011.

He was one of four employees installing 25 solar panels on the roof of a farm in Tibthorpe, East Yorkshire, when he fell through a rooflight and hit the concrete floor three metres below. He suffered a fractured skull and temporary partial hearing loss, but has since made a good recovery and returned to work.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigated and today (21 Oct) prosecuted Dodds Roofing Services Ltd at Bridlington Magistrates’ Court.

The court was told that the firm had provided a scaffold and crawling boards on the outside of the farm building, but had failed to act to adequately prevent a fall or to provide safety measures internally, such as nets or a scaffold, to mitigate the effects of a fall.

Dodds Roofing Services Ltd, of The Renewable Energy Centre, Bainton, Driffield, East Yorkshire, was fined £9,000 and ordered to pay £10,000 in costs after pleading guilty to a breach of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.

After the hearing, HSE Inspector Alan Sheldon said:

“This young man could very easily have sustained even worse injuries. Falls from height are a well-recognised hazard in the construction industry and falls through fragile rooflights are an all-too-common occurrence, and becoming more so with the advent of solar panels.

“This was an incident that could have been prevented had Dodds Roofing Services put recognised safety measures in place that were suitable and sufficient to protect their workers from the risks they faced. This could have included work equipment to prevent the fall and/or providing nets or a scaffold within the building in order to mitigate the effects of a fall.”

The latest HSE statistics show that 40 workers were killed and more than 3,400 were seriously injured in falls from height in 2011/12.

If you’ve got questions or need support on safety in the industrial, contracting or construction sectors please contact us for sensible and proportionate advice on 01453 800 100

Posted by Roger Hart

Working at height on an excavator – new requirements or best practice

Work at height on an excavator

We’ve heard tale recently of the issue of new legislative requirements for the protection of staff, maintenance fitters in particular, regarding falls from height when working on excavators.

Whilst you may have experience of larger contractors insisting that edge protection is fitted this isn’t a statutory requirement.  It is, however, good practice as the result of a fall can be significant.

The real story

Whilst it’s not written in stone a Principal Contractor would be well within his rights to insist that you have measures to prevent these falls in place, this could be guard rails or some other means such as fall arrest or bags to cushion any fall.  For most of us this means applying the best practice of edge protection will become the norm in the coming months.

In simple terms you must comply with the site operators  / owners requirement and if this means edge protection then that’s what will have to happen.  Don’t be too resistant to this as there is good sense behind this and its you and your staff who are being protected, we know you might have a grumble but better safe than sorry!

If you’ve got questions or need support on safety in the industrial, contracting or construction sectors please contact us for sensible and proportionate advice on 01453 800 100

Posted by Roger Hart

Road Safety Week 18 – 24 November 2013

Occupational road riskRoad Safety Week is coordinated by the road safety charity Brake and involves thousands of organisations, schools and communities promoting road safety. This year the week focuses on the theme tune in, urging everyone to stay focused when using roads and avoid distractions – a key message for employers to communicate.

To register to take part and get a free email action pack go to www.roadsafetyweek.org.uk

We’re all human: we daydream, get side-tracked, run late and make mistakes. But on roads, distractions can be fatal.

road safetyWhen using roads, we all need to tune in to road safety and give it our full attention – particularly if we’re at the wheel, but also when we’re walking, cycling, skating, running, you name it – to keep ourselves and each other safe.

Road Safety Week 2013 (18-24 Nov) focuses on the theme of tuning in to road safety and avoiding distractions, and we’re appealing to communities and organisations around the UK to register now to help get this life-saving message out.

The facts
Driver distraction is a major cause of death and serious injury in the UK [1]. Driving is the most dangerous thing that most of us do on a daily basis and requires your full attention, but many drivers have a sense of over-confidence and feel cocooned in their vehicles, so attempting to multi-task is common.

While it’s illegal to use a hand-held phone to text or call at the wheel, around a third of drivers flout this law [2], and many others use a hands-free kit, despite both activities causing a dangerous distraction [3]. Other distracting activities such as eating or smoking at the wheel have been shown to increase your risk of crashing [4], yet lots of drivers own up to it [5].

But distraction isn’t just an issue for drivers. For people on foot and bicycle, being sidetracked by your mobile, or not being able to hear due to listening to music, or forgetting to hold a child’s hand, can be lethal [6]; negotiating roads needs your full care and attention.

Our main messages
This year, we’re asking everyone to pledge to tune in to road safety – that means promising to do your best to keep focused on the task at hand, and never putting yourself and others in danger for the sake of a call, text or other activity that can wait.

During the Week, we’ll be particularly appealing to drivers to turn off their phones and never attempt to multi-task at the wheel. But this is also about all of us looking out for ourselves and each other, however we’re using roads, by not speaking to someone else on the phone who’s driving, and taking care to stay focused while on foot or bike: including getting off the phone, taking out headphones and following the good old green cross code to get across roads safely.

Get involved
There are countless ways you can promote this message and life-saving road safety awareness in your community or organisation during Road Safety Week and year-round. It’s up to you whether you tie in with our ‘tune in’ theme or focus on other road safety issues that are important in your area.

Check out the menu above for ideas for community groups, schools, organisations and road safety professionals about how you can get involved, and register now to get a free e-action pack with guidance and resources in advance of the Week.

Notes:
[1] Reported road casualties Great Britain annual reports 2011, Department for Transport, 2012 and Police Recorded Injury Road Traffic Collisions and Casualties Northern Ireland annual report 2011, Police Service of Northern Ireland, 2012
[2] Direct Line report on safe driving PART FIVE Driven to distraction, Brake and Direct Line, 2011
[3] Using a hands-free mobile whilst driving can be more dangerous than drink driving, Transport Research Laboratory, 2009
[4] Driving with one hand on the wheel – a fatal distraction, The University of Leeds, 2012
[5] Direct Line report on safe driving PART FIVE Driven to distraction, Brake and Direct Line, 2011
[6] The effects of mobile phone use on pedestrian crossing behaviour at signalised and unsignalised intersections, The University of New South Wales, 2007; and Mobile phone use while cycling: Incidence and effects on behaviour and safety, University of Groningen, 2010; and MP3 players and traffic safety; “State of the art”, Belgian Road Safety Institute, 2009; and Mobile telephones, distracted attention, and pedestrian safety, The Ohio State University, 2008

Help is at hand

If you need help or advice on any aspect of health and safety then please contact us or request a call back – or call and speak directly to a friendly consultant or occupational hygienist on 01453 800100. You can become a member of our Safety~net support service over the phone and get help right away, whatever your problem.

Posted by Roger Hart

CAA announces ‘Approved Training Organisation’ requirements

The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has announced details designed to inform flight training schools of the transition process they will need to follow to achieve ‘Approved Training Organisation’ status.

Something which was of great interest to us as we are expanding our services in this area and will be putting to gether a document to satisfy these needs before loking for partners who will work with us to develop it.

Around 188 training schools that are currently referred to as Registered Training Facilities (RTF) will have to become Approved Training Organisations (ATO) over the next two years to be able to continue providing flying lessons – part of a package of Europe-wide changes in the aviation pilot training industry.

To become ATOs, flying schools will be required to develop operating, safety and compliance manuals, and also undergo periodic audits.

Each Registered Training Facility (RTF) that wishes to continue to provide flight training for the issue of a Private Pilot Licence (PPL), for aeroplanes or helicopters, or for the Single Engine Piston Class Rating or Night Rating for aeroplanes, must become an Approved Training Organisation (ATO) by no later than the 8 April 2015. In addition, anyone intending to provide training for any Light Aircraft Pilot Licence (LAPL) for any category of aircraft must become an ATO before offering that training. However, ATO status does not, by itself, allow an organisation to begin LAPL training.

Structure of a safety management system

The universally accepted framework includes four main components and twelve elements, representing the minimum requirements for SMS. These ‘capabilities’ apply regardless of the aviation context. The four main components are;

  1. Safety policy and objectives
  2. Safety risk management
  3. Safety assurance
  4. Safety promotion

What a safety management system is

Managing safety is really about managing safety risk, which means trying to prevent bad things from happening, or if something does go wrong, or slips through the cracks, trying to minimise the consequences of the event.

Safety management is about accepting that things will go wrong and about reactively, proactively and predictively controlling risks to a level that is acceptable.

It can help you predict potential risks, take appropriate action and measure how well risk controls are working. It can give you the business information you would want to manage risks in other areas such as finance or productivity.

Help is at hand

If you need help developing documentation for Approved Training Organisations (ATO) status contact us.

Posted by Roger Hart

HSE Fee For Intervention has been served on an individual worker

HSEWith almost 12 months elapsed since the introduction of Fee For Intervention (FFI) we have heard for the first time of an individual being fined under the scheme.

The individual was employed as a scaffolder working on a Carey Housing project.  The HSE Inspector was driving by the site when he noticed the scaffolder working without edge protection, or any other method that might prevent him from failing.

The Inspector spoke directly to the scaffolder and explaining what he had observed regarding the material breach which the scaffolder had made. The result was that the scaffolder was personally issued with an Enforcement Notice and fined £400.

The Project Manager was next to be interviewed and discussions took place with regard to the role of the Principle Contractor under CDM, training requirements, competency, safe systems ofwork (including review of the sub-contractor’s method statements and risk assessments).

Perhaps not surprisingly the Inspector’s opinion was that the method statement submitted needed to be made more site specific. The detail which was omitted was the method of protection the scaffolder would be using — this should not be “generic” or left entirely to the scaffolder to decide upon but specified in writing.

No action taken against Careys, as the Principal Contractor, on this occasion, as the Inspector was, in general, pleased with what he had seen at site. However, the Inspector warned that individuals are being targeted and will continue to receive fines and an Enforcement Notice from the HSE if they break the law.

Examples of material breaches could include but are not limited to; failing to wear PPE, operating plant and equipment without the relevant training, failing to adhere to the method statement and risk assessments (RAMs), or for altering scaffolds if you are not trained.

The lesson?  Use your RAMS as working documents – this is how our documents have always been produced.  If you need help updating your own please call us for a clear and competitive cost.

About: Roger Hart  is Managing Director of Outsource Safety Ltd, a consultancy specialising in ISO9001, ISO14001 and OHSAS18001 Management Systems.  The company employs 10 staff and works for hundreds of retained clients across the UK in all sectors from Defence and Aerospace to Education and Museums with a specialism in the contracting, construction and renewables sectors, www.outsource-safety.co.uk

 

Posted by Roger Hart

BT FFI blitz on construction see’s half of all sites failing

hseAs we reported earlier this month, HSE have blitzed sites thorugh the UK and the latest news is that just under 50% of those visited have fallen below expected standards.  This i, of course another way of saying that there has been some ‘material breach’ which in turn means FFI at £124 per hour.

Around 1,000 sites have already been visite and the drive will continue until September 27th, just a few days before the end of the first 12 months since Fee For Intervention (FFI) began in October 2012.

Meanwhile UCATT has renewed its own call for greater funding for construction inspections with UCATT general secretary Steve Murphy said:

“While these initiatives by the HSE are very welcome, inspectors are only visiting a small percentage of all the construction sites in the country.

“These findings demonstrate why the HSE needs more resources to conduct this type of inspection in all parts of the country throughout the year.”

If you need help or advice on  any aspect of health and safety then please contact us or request a call back – or call and speak directly to a friendly consultant or occupational hygienist on 01453 800100. You can become a member of our Safety~net support service over the phone and get help right away, whatever your problem.

Posted by Roger Hart

Duty of care and fleet risk management

Employers must take every precaution to protect employees driving fleet vehicles as legislation looms large.

Fleet Legislation

There are a range of laws and fleet legislation that fleet managers and their drivers need to adhere to. These range from road safety laws such as speed limit regulations, anti-drink driving legislation and minimum vehicle standards rules to health and safety regulations in the workplace and even anti-smoking laws that apply in company vehicles.

In 2008 the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act became statute law and even though up to now no prosecutions under this act have been brought this is still the ultimate piece of legislation to be fearful of.

The Act means that an organisation is guilty of the offence if the way in which its activities are managed or organised causes a death and amounts to a gross breach of a relevant duty of care to the deceased. A substantial part of the breach must have been in the way activities were managed by senior management.

Companies and organisations that take their obligations under health and safety law seriously are not likely to be in breach of the new provisions. Nonetheless, companies and organisations should keep their health and safety management systems under review, in particular, the way in which their activities are managed or organised by senior management and this includes all aspects of fleet management and driving for work and on company business.

Requirements of the Board

The board should set the direction for effective health and safety management. Board members need to establish a health and safety policy (which includes fleet management and driving at work) that is much more than a document – it should be an integral part of your organisation’s culture, of its values and performance standards.

All board members should take the lead in ensuring the communication of health and safety duties and benefits throughout the organisation. Executive directors must develop policies to avoid health and safety problems and must respond quickly where difficulties arise or new risks are introduced; non-executives must make sure that health and safety is properly addressed.

Lifetime costs

The true costs of accidents to organisations are nearly always higher than just the costs of repairs and insurance claims. The consequences of an accident on the self-employed and small businesses are likely to be proportionately greater than on a larger business with greater resources. The benefits to a business from managing work-related road safety can be considerable, no matter the size of the business.

It allows a business to exercise better control over costs, such as wear and tear and fuel, insurance premiums and legal fees and claims from employees and third parties. It also allows management to make informed decisions about matters such as driver training and vehicle purchase, and helps identify where health and safety improvements can be made.

In summary

Case studies and research have shown that benefits from managing work-related road safety and reducing crashes include: fewer days lost due to injury; reduced risk of work-related ill health; reduced stress and improved morale; less need for investigation and paperwork; less lost time due to work rescheduling; fewer vehicles off the road for repair; reduced running costs through better driving standards; fewer missed orders and business opportunities so reduced risk of losing the goodwill of customers.

Promoting sound health and safety driving practices and a good safety culture at work may well spill over into private driving, which could reduce the chances of staff being injured in a crash outside work.

If you need help or advice on fleet risk management or any aspect of health and safety then please contact us or request a call back – or call and speak directly to a friendly consultant or occupational hygienist on 01453 800100. You can become a member of our Safety~net support service over the phone and get help right away, whatever your problem.

Posted by Roger Hart

Company fined after man seriously injured on Cheltenham building site

A Swindon civil engineering company, John O’Flynn Developments Limited, has been fined after a worker was seriously injured by a reversing tipper truck at a Cheltenham building site.

The groundworker, who does not wish to be identified, was struck from behind by the vehicle as it delivered aggregates to a development off Tommy Taylor’s Lane on 7 August 2012.  He suffered serious injuries to his left leg, including a severed artery, a severely damaged thigh muscle and a large puncture wound. He was airlifted to hospital, and was unable to work for seven weeks.

Cheltenham Magistrates’ Court heard today (6 September) that his employer, Swindon-based John O’Flynn Developments Limited, failed to put adequate safety measures in place to prevent the incident.

The firm was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after an investigation found that not enough was done to segregate workers on the ground from moving vehicles.

The injured working was using a noisy floor saw to cut a channel in a roadway when he was struck. The road should have been closed to site traffic, or vehicle movements closely supervised and monitored to ensure there was no risk.

John O’Flynn Developments Limited, of Bramble Road, Swindon, was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay a further £3,892 in costs after pleading guilty to beaching Section 2(1) of the Health & Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

After the hearing, HSE inspector James Lucas said:

“Despite the known risks of allowing vehicles unrestricted access on construction sites, numerous vehicles had to pass through the area where the injured worker and others were positioned in order to make deliveries.

“There were no measures were in place to safely segregate workers from vehicles, and as the worker had his back to the reversing vehicle as he used a noisy floor saw he did not see or hear it approach.

“John O’Flynn Developments failed to implement basic safety measures and an employee was seriously injured as a result.”

Further information on safely managing vehicle movements on construction sites can be found on the HSE website at http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/safetytopics/vehiclestrafficmanagement.htm

If you need help or advice on COSHH, dust exposure, health surveillance or any aspect of health and safety then please contact us or request a call back – or call and speak directly to a friendly consultant or occupational hygienist on 01453 800100. You can become a member of our Safety~net support service over the phone and get help right away, whatever your problem.

Posted by Roger Hart

Freight company fined £50,000 after fork lift driver hit by falling pallets

A Suffolk-based freight company has been sentenced for a series of safety breaches after a forklift truck toppled and spilled its load onto a worker, breaking his back.

Freight company fined £50,000 after fork lift driver hit by falling pallets

 

Neil Jennings, 56, of Ipswich, was waiting for his trailer to be loaded in the yard of Eagle Freight Terminal Ltd at its Great Blakenham premises when one of the forklifts doing the loading hit a pothole. The vehicle lurched sideways, shedding its pallets and boxes, one of which hit Mr Jennings.

He suffered multiple fractures to the vertebrae of his upper and middle back and was unable to work for several weeks. Mr Jennings can now only undertake light duties and can no longer carry out everyday tasks without pain and discomfort.

HSE found that the freight yard road surface was pitted with potholes and had been the subject of complaints by the company’s employees over a significant period. There was little management of traffic movements and no instructions provided regarding segregation of workplace transport and pedestrians.

The court was told that two Improvement Notices were served by HSE on Eagle Freight after the incident requiring them to remedy the condition of the yard’s surface and to introduce systems of control which would allow vehicles and pedestrians to circulate safely at the site. Despite two extensions of time to allow the remedial work to be completed, an inspection carried out in September 2012 revealed no work had been completed and neither of the Notices had been complied with.

Ipswich Magistrates’ Court heard that the company had been subject to similar enforcement action by HSE as far back as 2002/3 about the lack of control of workplace transport.

Eagle Freight Terminal Ltd of Lodge Lane, Great Blakenham, Ipswich, was fined a total of £50,000 and ordered to pay costs of £4,501.23 plus £120 victim surcharge after pleading guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, Regulation 9(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998, Regulation 17(1) of the Workplace [Health, Safety and Welfare] Regulations 1992 and for failing to comply with two Improvement Notices.

After the case, HSE Inspector Paul Grover, said:

“This was an entirely preventable injury caused by persistent disregard by Eagle Freight of basic safety measures. The company allowed the yard’s surface to deteriorate so badly that forklift trucks were regularly destabilised when carrying loads.

“There was also no system to allow vehicles and pedestrians to move safely around each other and the forklift truck driver had not been given suitable training which resulted in him using unsafe work practices where the truck was driven with the forks and load lifted.

“The company’s subsequent repeated failure to meet the requirements of the two improvement notices demonstrated their complete disregard for their legal responsibility to keep their employees, and non-employees visiting the site, safe.

“The risks of serious injury and, all too frequently, death, resulting from the failure to control the safe movement of vehicles and pedestrians are widely recognised.

“Putting safe working practices in place is often simple and inexpensive and where this doesn’t happen the costs, both financial and personal, can be immense.”

If you need help or advice on fork lift trucks, logistics or warehouse risk management or any aspect of health and safety then please contact us or request a call back – or call and speak directly to a friendly consultant on 01453 800100. You can become a member of our Safety~net support service over the phone and get help right away, whatever your problem.

Posted by Roger Hart

Controlling dust from construction work, common sense advice from the safety geeks

We, as health and safety consultants, could be described as a bit geeky.  We try not to be but it’s hard!  Beyond this is the Occupational Hygienist specialising in air monitoring and health at work, the ‘geeks geek’ and one of the things we do is controlling dust.

Controlling dust from construction work, common sense advice from the safety geeks

Without the support of an Occupational Hygienist many safety professionals do well in managing their everyday risks but often stop short from getting a firm grip on protecting employee health, when the truth is that it’s really relatively straightforward.  With FFI now affecting almost every sector you need to be aware that not managing employee health means rich pickings for HSE when they quote Regulation 11 of COSHH, Health Surveillance – enough to strike fear into all but the most hardened safety manager.

Occupational hygiene

The good news is that some of the geekiness is disappearing and giving way to common sense.  We have always advised our construction clients that YES, we are very competent and equipped to carry out any kind of air test for dust exposure but we don’t ALWAYS think that paying us to come in and report on dust exposure for your workers at site is necessary.

The reasons for this are twofold;

  • Firstly, if you control risks using simple good practice such as water mist to suppress dust we simply won’t have anything to measure, and;
  • Secondly, we’re we still to measure our results would be applicable to that site of work – changes in location, process, substrate and so on would make the report of dubious value for the next site.

Of course, there are sometimes exceptions to the above but they are few and far between for most in the construction industry.  The good news is that our common sense has now been enshrined in the latest guidance on the subject from HSE – very handy when we’re speaking to an inspector, client, safety manager or insurer on your behalf; Construction Information Sheets 36 and also CIS69

Now, this is not to make light of the matter.  Look at the facts:  5000 construction workers die each year from dust inhalation related diseases, so what should you do?

  1. Instead of opting for cut-off saws, look at tools such as block splitters and laminate guillotines. Not only do they produce less dust, you may even find them more efficient…
  2. Silica-free abrasives must always be used for what used to be called “sand blasting” and don’t rely on the fact they abrasives are used wet, exposure to RCS can still occur if you’re high pressure water jetting;
  3. Select tools which have wetting systems or at the least built in extraction. We would regard these systems as pretty much compulsory when cutting kerbs, blocks and paving with a cut-off saw – water suppression must be used along with respiratory protection.
  4. If using the wetting system, make sure enough water is supplied for it to be effective. Wetting beforehand just won’t work.
  5. If on-tool extraction is being used, you’ll need a proper extraction unit, not just a general commercial vacuum cleaner.

Take a look at your site today concentrating in particular on the following;

  1. cutting kerb stones and concrete blocks;
  2. raking mortar;
  3. cutting roof tiles;
  4. grinding;
  5. drilling for 15 to 30 minutes in total; and
  6. abrasive pressure blasting

If you need help or advice on health and safety please contact us or request a call back – or call and speak to a friendly expert on 01453 800100.

Posted by Roger Hart