De Menezes death - Met convicted
Ed- the death of John Charles de Menezes was a shocking event. The Metropolitan Police were prosecuted
and convicted after a trial. For being convicted of breaching the general health and safety duty they owed
to the public, including, of course Jean Charles de Menezes they were fined £175,000 and ordered to pay
costs of £385,000
The HSE’s subsequent prosecution of the Metropolitan Police demonstrates effectively that health and safety
law applies to most employment situations in the UK - although there are still some limited examples of
Crown Immunity that allows some government departments to avoid the sharpest scrutiny and sanction for
health and safety failings. I am going to devote the opening pages of this edition of BRN to the Metropolitan
police’s conviction and its aftermath. As the trial, conviction and aftermath straddled the month end if
I followed the normal practice of carrying October’s news in the edition labelled October I’d carry half the
story this month and half next. My aim is to cover it all here in this edition.
Many of the key people involved, such as Sir Ian Blair, the Home Secretary and the Chairman of the Metropolitan
police authority have made statements following the conviction. And then we also have the Independent
Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) reports - known as Stockwell 1 and 2. Read what they’ve all
said - and make your own mind up in whether the police do finally accept they were in breach of the law.
In bringing the case against the Metropolitan police under s3 HSWA 1974 the prosecution alleged 19 separate
failings by them, namely:
1. There was a failure adequately to communicate Commander McDowell’s strategy to the officers who took over the running of the operation on 22 July, the surveillance officers and the firearms officers.
2. There was a failure adequately to plan for or carry out Commander McDowell’s strategy for controlling the premises.
3. The control room officers, the firearms officers and the surveillance officers had a confused and inconsistent understanding of what the strategy was for Scotia Road.
4. There was a failure to deploy officers to stop and question persons emerging from the Scotia Road premises, including Mr de Menezes.
5. There was a failure to ensure that an CO19 firearms team was in attendance at Scotia Road when Mr de Menezes emerged from the communal doorway.
6. There was a failure to have a contingency plan for dealing with persons who emerged from a block of flats before CO19 arrived.
7. There was a failure to stop and question the persons emerging from the Scotia Road premises.
8. There was a failure to identify a safe and appropriate area where those leaving Scotia Road could be stopped and questioned.
9. The briefings given to firearms officers at Leman Street and Nightingale Lane police premises were inaccurate and unbalanced and provided the firearms officers with inadequate and inaccurate information about the operation at Scotia Road.
10. Information as to the identification of Mr de Menezes, his clothing and likely level of threat was not properly or accurately assessed of disseminated to officers and in particular the firearms officers.
11. There was a failure to ensure that doubts about the correctness of the identification of Mr de Menezes as the suspect were communicated to relevant officers in the control room at New Scotland Yard.
12. The control room officers failed to satisfy themselves that a positive identification of Mr de Menezes as the suspect had been made by the surveillance officers.
13. There was a failure to deploy firearms officers at relevant locations in time to prevent Mr de Menezes from getting onto a bus and entering Stockwell Tube Station.
14. The firearms officers failed to satisfy themselves that a positive identification of Mr de Menezes as the suspect had been made by the surveillance officers.
15. There was a failure to take effective steps to stop tubes or buses or take other traffic management steps so as to minimise the risk to the travelling public.
16. Mr de Menezes was twice permitted to get onto a bus and to enter Stockwell underground station despite being suspected of being a suicide bomber and despite having emerged from an address linked to a suspected suicide bomber.
17. There was a failure to give a clear or timely order that Mr de Menezes be stopped or arrested before he entered Stockwell Tube Station.
18. There was a failure to give accurate information to Commander Dick as to the whereabouts of CO19 when she was deciding whether C019 or C012 surveillance officers stop Mr de Menezes.
19. There was a failure to minimise the risk inherent in effecting the arrest of Mr de Menezes by armed officers
whether in relation to the location, timing or manner of his arrest.
Sir Ian Blair’s response
The death of Jean Charles de Menezes was a tragedy. He was an innocent man. The Metropolitan Police service has apologised to the family and friends of Mr de Menezes many times in the past. Once more I express my deep regrets for his death.
The Metropolitan Police have been fond guilty of a breach of health and safety legislation in relation to the death of Mr de Menezes. As far as we know, this is the first time that such legislation has been applied to fast-moving police operations where the public are in danger. In large part, it was concern over the implications
of applying health and safety legislation to such an operation which led the Metropolitan Police to plead not guilty.
Peter Clarke - the national co-ordinator of terrorist investigations - and I have been in court to listen to the verdict of the jury and the observations of Mr Justice Henriques. What we are going to do now do is to take time to consider whether and how any of our current operating practices need to be altered in the light of this conviction.
Our first priority, as always, remains the safety of the public. It is important to remember that no police officer set out that day to shoot an innocent man.
I am certain that this death was the culmination of actions by many hands, all of whom were doing their best to handle the terrible threat facing London on that day - a race against time to find the failed suicide bombers of the day before. I echo the observations of the trial judge that a number of officers involved in this case behaved with exemplary bravery.
I also want to express my support for all officers involved in counter-terrorist work across the UK, including Deputy Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick, about whom the jury has specifically asked that it be noted that no culpability attaches to her as a result of their verdict.
I want to make clear that the people of London should have full confidence in the Met’s ability to deal professionally
with dangerous and difficult situations. We do so every day.
In the past 12 months, for instance, we have responded to nearly 10,000 calls potentially involving firearms.
Police have fired their weapons on three occasions.
In the last four years, together with our partners, we have disrupted and detected a dozen planned terrorist attacks on the United Kingdom, mostly involving this city.
Furthermore, our policies and processes for dealing with life-threatening situations have recently been commended by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary.
By contrast, the difficulties shown in this trial were those of an organisation struggling, on a single day, to get to grips with a simply extraordinary situation - its greatest operational challenge in a generation.
The judge noted that this was an isolated breach of law in quite extraordinary circumstances.
Seven days later, they successfully arrested the failed bombers of 21 July.
The operation to secure those arrests involved many of the officers who were involved in the operation concerning Scotia Road.
As the judge noted, the failures alleged were not sustained or repeated.
This case thus provides no evidence at all of systematic failure by the Metropolitan Police service and I therefore intend to continue to lead the Met in its increasingly successful efforts to reduce crime and to deter and disrupt terrorist activities in London and elsewhere in the UK.
At the same time, it will be my personal task to ensure that the lessons learnt from the death of Mr de Menezes are incorporated into our training, our policy and our operations.
The Home Secretary said:
“The death of Jean Charles de Menezes was a profoundly shocking tragedy
and the de Menezes family have my deepest sympathy. This was a complex case which raised a number of important issues for policing. We will consider carefully the implications of the verdict with the police service. The trial reminds us all of the extremely demanding circumstances
under which the police work to protect us from further terrorist attack. The Commissioner and the Metropolitan Police remain in the forefront of the fight against crime and terrorism. They have my full confidence
and our thanks and support in the difficult job that they do."
New head of the HSC
On her first day in office the Health and Safety Commission's new Chair, Judith Hackitt CBE, has called for more board level engagement and ownership on health and safety issues. Judith Hackitt, who has been a commissioner with HSC, returns from an assignment as Director of the Chemistry for Europe project with the European Chemical Industry Council, to take up the top post as the HSC and Health and Safety Executive
(HSE) gear up to face challenging times ahead including a proposed merger to create a single regulatory body. Ms Hackitt, brings extensive industry experience particularly in the field of health and safety, said, "I am delighted to return to HSC and lead an organisation that has played a crucial role in improving Britain's
health and safety record. I look forward to working with members of the Commission, the Health and Safety Executive, our partners in local government, trade unions and business leaders who have all played a vital role in influencing the safety culture in this country."
"With the latest figures showing 241 workplace fatalities, 146,000 serious injuries and two million reported cases of work-related ill-health, there is no room for complacency. More needs to be done in addressing the enormous challenges of improving health and safety in our workplaces. To improve our safety record we need strong and committed boardroom leadership that focuses on real causes of harm in the workplace and not trivia."
Ed
1. Judith Hackitt's appointment commences on 1st October 2007 and will be for a term of five years. Her appointment will be on a three day per week basis.
2. Judith Hackitt was trained as a Chemical Engineer at Imperial College, London. She was previously employed
as Group Risk Manager at Elementis PLC with world-wide responsibility for health and safety insurance
and litigation. In 1998 she joined the Chemical Industries Association as Director of Business and Environment.
She became Director General of the Association in April 2002. She was appointed as a member of the Health and Safety Commission on the same date. She held that post until December 2005.
3. Judith Hackitt was awarded a CBE in June 2006 for her services to health and safety at work.
4. The HSC has overall responsibility for occupational health and safety regulations in Great Britain. The Commission consists of 10 people nominated by bodies with an interest in workplace health and safety. They are sponsored by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). The DWP minister for occupational health and safety is Lord McKenzie of Luton.
Transport death
TNT Logistics UK Ltd of TNT House, Holly Lane, Atherstone, Warwickshire, was fined £120,000 and ordered to pay total costs of £28,184.75 after pleading guilty at Manchester Crown Court to breaching section 2(1) HSWA 1974. Lorry driver Derek Howe, aged 56, suffered fatal injuries on 15 May 2004 when he fell off a lorry parked at TNT's premises at Brinell Drive in Irlam. He was trying to help free a worktop on the back of the lorry when he fell approximately two metres onto the concrete yard.
HSE inspector Richard Clarke said:
"Mr Howe's death could have been prevented if TNT had taken appropriate precautions in line with health and safety legislation. Every year 700 people are injured at work falling from vehicles. Falls are currently the second highest cause of fatalities and injuries in the transport industry. Even falling a short distance can be very serious, or even fatal. Employers and self-employed people operating lorries need to avoid the need for work at height on the lorry wherever possible. Where that is not possible, they must take measures to prevent falls. Companies should ensure staff are adequately trained in how to reduce the risks. Climbing on top of loads should be avoided wherever possible and permanent platforms or gantries may assist with this."
Transport troubles
The transport industry continues to have one of the worst records for major injuries due to falls from vehicles during the loading and unloading of goods. Figures released by the HSE in 2004/05 showed that transport accounted for 31% of all workplace fatalities. With an estimated 3 million people in Great Britain working with vehicles as part of their normal job, the HSE's ongoing workplace transport campaign seeks to warn workers to take sensible precautions to minimise risks in all vehicle related work.
Marking the current awareness campaign, Judith Hackitt, Chair of the HSC said, "Every year 2000 workers are seriously injured after falling from their vehicle. It is vital that those who work in the transport industry take this issue seriously. Last year four workers actually lost their lives after falling from their truck or lorry and the cost of these deaths and serious injuries to the industry is in excess of £35 million a year. A majority of falls lead to serious injuries that affect workers and their families. Simple sensible precautions can avoid these incidents and the distress they cause. Those who buy and manage the many fleets of workplace vehicles
up and down the country have an opportunity to set a real leadership example."
The awareness campaign aims to help those who are responsible for buying and managing workplace vehicles
with simple steps that can be taken to improve the safety of vehicles:
- Vehicles should be well maintained and checked regularly
- Procedures for loading and unloading should avoid the need to work at height where possible
- Floor surfaces should be anti slip when possible, or, slip-resistant footwear provided
- If work at height is unavoidable steps, platforms and other safety equipment should be provided
Extensive guidance and advice, including safety checklists, is available to vehicle buyers, managers and workers at an interactive falls from vehicle homepage: http://www.hse.gov.uk/fallsfromvehicles/index.htm
Single copies of the CD Rom version of campaign materials are available from HSE Books using stock code MISC748a from: http://www.hsebooks.com/Books/default.asp
Ed-
1. The objective of HSE's Workplace Transport Programme is a 10% reduction in major, fatal and "three day" injuries arising from Workplace Transport incidents, by 2010. Reducing the number of falls from vehicles is a key part of HSE's Workplace Transport Programme.
2. The 'Falls from Vehicles' Campaign interactive website contains a range of useful information including information sheets covering the basics of preventing falls; specifying the right equipment; selecting vehicle flooring materials and footwear, and case studies that give examples of good practice. More information is available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/fallsfromvehicles/index.htm
3. The 'Falls from Vehicles' campaign has been timed to run alongside the 'Moving Goods Safely' targeted inspection initiative. The 'Moving Goods Safely' initiative concentrates on risks to employees from workplace
transport, manual handling, slips & trips and working at heights. HSE and LA inspectors will work on joint inspections, which primarily provide an opportunity for employers and staff to get advice on good working practices. However, if they discover serious examples of bad working practice they can take enforcement
action. More information is available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/movinggoods/index.htm
4. The HSE construction division are also running a 'Falls from Vehicles' campaign with focused inspections in the construction industry in October, November and December 2007. In addition a number of educational
and promotional events have been arranged in partnership with industry. More information is available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/fallscampaign.htm
Fatal Fall
F J Chalcroft (Construction) Ltd of Hamlin Way, The Narrows, Kings Lynn, Norfolk, were fined £260,000 and ordered to pay £80,000 costs by Nottingham Crown Court after pleading guilty to breaching Section 2 (1) and 3 (1) HSWA 1974.
Daniel Askew, aged 22, from Capel Iwan, Pembrokeshire, died when he fell ten metres after leaning on an unsecured handrail on the mezzanine area of a cold store under construction at the premises of Phil Hanley Ltd, on the Belle Eau Industrial Park, Bilsthorpe, Nottinghamshire in November 2003.
HSE inspector Cliff Seymour said: "This was a tragic accident which resulted in the death of young man with his life ahead of him. Falls from height remain the most common kind of accident causing fatal injuries. Latest figures show that 46 people died from a fall from height at work in 2005/06, with 3,351 seriously injured. Companies involved in building, refurbishment or maintenance should ensure that the work is planned properly and sensible measures taken so that workers are not exposed to risk.
This case graphically illustrates that risks should be properly assessed and the results acted upon to ensure that decisions can be taken on what is the most appropriate equipment and working practices to be used to ensure safety."
Citizens’ Jury delivers views on air quality
Members of the public have met Local Environment Quality Minister Jonathan Shaw to present the findings of a Citizens' Jury on air quality issues. Three representatives of the jury handed over their report, "Articulating
public values in environmental policy development", at a meeting with the Minister and his air quality
policy team. Defra will now consider the report and respond to its findings.
Receiving the report for Defra, Jonathan Shaw said: "This innovative approach is a refreshingly direct way of engaging with people to understand their thoughts and concerns. I was very interested to hear about how the jurors found the process. I will now be looking at the report in detail, and considering how it can inform our policy making. Twenty two members of the public were recruited last year from a range of rural, urban and city environments across the West Midlands to take part in the air quality discussion. They were asked to consider what improvements they would like to see in air quality and how these should be achieved. The jury identified the questions they wanted answered, and heard evidence from a range of air quality experts, with an opportunity to cross-examine 'witnesses'.
They formulated recommendations for action based around six themes - education, technology, transport, industry, regulation, and lifestyle choices.
Key conclusions from the report include:
* that it is the responsibility of everyone to take action and vital that the public is better informed about how they can help;
* that industry should continue to strive to improve products and processes through technological developments;
* that financial incentives, rather than penalties such as taxes, have a role to play in encouraging behaviour change;
* that regulation should be light touch so as to not disadvantage UK industry's competitiveness or poorer individuals in society; and that
* Government has a wider role in the development of an infrastructure that will encourage and support behaviour change.
Ed - Gordon Brown is a great believer in Citizens’ Juries. Are they anything more than a gimmic - or is it a realisation that our existing democratic structures are not delivering?
Tougher targets for packaging waste
More packaging would be recovered and recycled under proposals set out in a consultation published by Environment Minister Joan Ruddock. New business targets would come into effect in January 2008 to help the UK meet its obligations under the EC Packaging Directive. Higher targets are proposed for 2009 and beyond to increase the level of recovery and recycling. After 2008 it is at the discretion of Member States to set targets beyond the minimum required by the Packaging Directive and the UK has made clear that its aim is to continue to improve performance on packaging waste because of the environmental benefits this brings.
Joan Ruddock said: "Since the introduction of the UK Packaging Regulations packaging recycling has improved
significantly, from just 27% in 1997 to over 57% last year. But there is much more to be done. Further cuts in packaging waste are an essential part of reducing our reliance on landfill and cutting greenhouse
gas emissions. The higher targets can also act as a driver to help design out unnecessary packaging in future."
The EU minimum recycling and recovery targets are 55% and 60% respectively. The Government's preferred option would increase the recycling target to 55.7% in 2008, 56.8% in 2009 and 58.4% in 2010, and the recovery target to 60.6%, 61.8% and 63.4% in the same years.
Recycling packaging reduces CO2 emissions because less energy is used to extract and process recycled materials than virgin ones, particularly materials like aluminium. As well as the environmental benefits of cutting CO2 emissions and reducing reliance on landfill, the proposals have cost benefits of around £1.1m - the difference between the estimated costs to producers of £7.7m, and carbon savings estimated at £8.8m.
The proposals are consistent with the Government's 'polluter pays' principal, and the aims of the new Waste Strategy for England which was published in May.
Ed
The consultation is published at http://www.defra.gov.uk and closes on 30 November 2007.
The target system applies to businesses that handle more than 50 tonnes of packaging a year and with an annual turnover of over £2m. It encourages producers to reduce their packaging levels because this reduces
the cost to them of recycling and recovering their waste.
Proposed targets of the Government's preferred option:
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Paper 67.5% 68.5% 69.5% 70.5% 71.5%
Glass 78.5% 80.0% 81.0% 82% 84%
Aluminium 38.0% 39.0% 40.0% 41% 42%
Steel 68.0% 68.5% 69.0% 70% 71%
Plastic 26.0% 27.0% 29.0% 31% 33%
Wood 20.5% 21.0% 22.0% 23% 24%
Recovery 69.0% 70.0% 71.0% 73% 75%
Scalded to death in a care home
Sussex-based nursing care home owners, Alan Lucas and Richard Wooton of The Ormsby Centre, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) HSWA 1974, at Worthing Magistrates Court and were fined £16,000 each plus £22,560 in total costs. This followed an incident on 2 November 2005.
Two care assistants placed 86 year old Bettina East, a resident at The Ormsby Centre into a bath. The care assistants failed to carry out a number of health and safety checks, including a full temperature check, before
lowering her into the bath. As a subsequence, Mrs East suffered severe scalding to her legs. She tragically
died days later. The scalds were confirmed to be a contributory factor to her death.
Speaking after the Hearing HSE Inspector Maria Strangward said: "This case highlights the serious consequences
of not sticking to the guidance set by Health and Safety for residential care homes.
"There are a number of reasonable measures the care assistants could have taken that would have prevented
this tragic incident. These measures are set out in the Health and Safety guidance for residential care homes, which every care home should have access to."
Ed - see Health and Safety in Residential Care Homes. HSG 220 (HSE).ISBN 0-7176-2082-4. Hazardous Water
Temperatures :
At water temperatures over 50C there is a risk of scalding which rises with increasing temperatures. The risk is increased in care homes as residents are elderly and may be prone to sensory loss. For situations where whole body immersion takes place, such as baths and showers and these are accessible to residents, water temperatures should be controlled to 43C.
Circulating hot water should be at over 60C, to avoid risks associated with Legionella. Safe hot water systems
include thermostatic mixers with fail-safe devices, single lever mixers or control mechanical mixers with built-in tamperproof hot water limiting devices. Access to areas should be restricted and some residents
may require supervision by adequately trained staff.
Hand Injury
Jennor Timber Ltd, of Lockfield Avenue, Enfield has been fined £4,000 and ordered to pay costs of £3,921, at the City of London Magistrates Court after pleading guilty of breaching section 2(1) of HSWA 1974.
In May 2005, employee Peter Brooks, 64, of Hackney, was working on a piece of wood about five feet long using a heavy duty spindle moulder when, it is believed, the wood was ripped out of his hands, exposing them to the cutters. There were no "end stops" to prevent the wood from ejecting and Mr Brooks had decided
not to use a jig, which would have acted as a barrier between his hand and the blade, as the material was considered too long. Mr Brooks lost parts of 2 fingers.
Gavin Pugh, HSE Inspector said: "It is essential that safe systems of work are adhered to and there should be management systems in place to monitor workers at all timber mills. Machine jigs should have been used with limited cutter projection tooling, which should be in place to prevent very severe injuries if any part of the body touches the rotating blade."
New regulator for health and social care
A supposedly tougher new regulator for health and adult social care services has been announced by the Secretary of State for Health Alan Johnson.
The Care Quality Commission will have a key role in tackling and preventing Healthcare Associated Infections
(HCAIs) as well as strengthening the current system of regulation. They will have the power to carry out annual infection control inspections, increase the frequency of checks for hospitals with high rates of HCAIs, and take rapid action to close down wards if necessary, making sure that they are thoroughly cleaned before they can be reopened for patients. They will also be able to issue early warning notices in order to ensure Trusts take swift action when issues arise.
Alan Johnson said:
"Despite progress, tackling infection remains a challenge for the NHS. I am determined that we will take action
where necessary to safeguard patients and ensure staff feel able to report concerns.
"The regulator will have tougher powers to inspect and even close wards in order to protect patients and service users. NHS staff, such as matrons, nurses and porters, who spend every day on the wards, need to feel able to report concerns to the new regulator. The Care Quality Commission will ensure that all patients
receive a safe and quality service, no matter what part of the system they are accessing, and at which point."
The new regulator will focus on safety and quality across health and adult social care services, in both the NHS and the independent sector. It is supposed to provide a more consistent approach to regulation and reduce administrative burdens on frontline services. The government says it will also be more flexible, to ensure it is fit for the future as services develop and to ensure that it can concentrate resources on the areas of greatest concern. The Care Quality Commission will also have an important role in supporting patient choice, through assessing and providing information on the performance of providers of adult social care and health care, and in ensuring value for taxpayers' money.
The government announcement says that the Care Quality Commission will bring together the experience and expertise of the Healthcare Commission, the Commission for Social Care Inspection and the Mental Health Act Commission. The Care Quality Commission will be able to take rapid and appropriate action against any health and adult social care organisation that is putting patients or service users at risk. The wider range of enforcement options available will include:
- increasing the frequency of inspection, including unannounced spot checks;
- undertaking investigations;
- issuing warning notices;
- fining providers; or
- closing services.
Alan Johnson added:
"I am determined to ensure that the distinct needs of social care are recognised by the new regulatory body, and that it uses and develops the expertise of the Mental Health Act Commission."
The proposals to create the new regulator are included in the Department's response to the consultation 'The future regulation of health and adult social care in England'. The powers of the Care Quality Commission
will be included in the new Health and Social Care Bill, due to be introduced in Parliament this year.
Ed the performance of the regulators in this field over the years has been patchy and inconsistent. Having one regulator won’t necessarily improve the professionalism of those involved - which appears to be where the existing regulators have been going wrong.
Rare prosecution of an Employee
Richard Lenton, age 42, of Coventry was (on Monday 1 October) fined £800 and ordered to pay costs of £100 at Coventry Magistrate's Court after pleading guilty to breaching Section 7 HSWA 1974. The case followed
an incident that left David Griffiths with spinal and pelvic injuries after he was crushed between two parts of a machine when Lenton set a 1,500 tonne transfer power press into motion.
Mr Griffiths, age 45, of Birmingham, was seriously injured on 15 January 2007 when he was setting up the steel press for a diecast change on a power press in Covpress Ltd of Coventry. Mr Griffiths was adjusting the suction cups of a steel carrier (manipulator) whilst located in an interlocked, guarded area housing the power press. The interlocked gates were open to prevent the machine from operating. Lenton, the press setter, needed to adjust the machine to change the height of the blank sheets feeding the press. He closed the interlocked gates with Mr Griffiths still in the guarded area. Shortly afterwards, Lenton pressed a control
button to return the manipulator to automatic mode. The manipulator, carrying a blank steel sheet, moved to a central position trapping Mr Griffiths against the conveyor feeding the blanks into the power press.
Speaking after the case, HSE investigating inspector Pam Folsom said:
"Interlocked guarding had been provided by the company to prevent the machine from operating when the interlocked gates were closed. However, the gates had been deliberately closed with a man in the danger zone, thus defeating the guarding system. All operators are trained to operate the presses in a safe manner and are fully conversant with the implications of their actions. In this case a thoughtless moment caused severe spinal injuries to a fellow worker. Guarding and fencing of automated machinery is a basic requirement
and the standards are well known. Simple checks should be carried out not only to ensure workers are protected from dangerous machinery and that safety features fitted are in good order but also that employees operate equipment safely without endangering others."
Ed - Section 7 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 states: "It shall be the duty of every employee while at work - (a) to take reasonable care for the health and safety of himself and of other persons who may be affected by his acts or omissions at work; and
(b) as regards any duty or requirement imposed on his employer or any other person by or under and of the relevant statutory provisions, to co-operate with him so far as is necessary to enable that duty or requirement
to be performed or complied with."
s7 prosecutions are rare - perhaps unduly so.
Working at Height Prosecution
RTAL Ltd was fined £25,000 with £5000 costs and Managing Director Terry Green was fined £2500 and order to pay costs of £500, at Basildon Crown Court on 8th October, after admitting Health and Safety offences
following the death of a 29-year-old Sheffield man in 2003. On 24 January 2003, Andrew George Taylor, was fatally injured in a fall of some 8m at the RTAL factory premises in Fort Road, Tilbury. He fell from the edge of a fixed platform, at which the protective guardrail had been removed temporarily, to carry out some work of installing a kiln.
HSE Inspector, Sandy Carmichael said:
"This was a serious breach of obligation to both its own staff and visiting workers, indicative of failure by the company to appreciate the risks from such complex work. Andrew Taylor's tragic and wasteful death could and should have been avoided by straightforward safety precautions. This case illustrates how things can go tragically wrong when plans are not thought through and risks are not properly controlled. HSE will not hesitate to take action against those who fall short of the law in such a way."
Dwr Cymru guilty of supplying unfit water
Dwr Cymru Welsh Water pleaded guilty at Caernarfon Magistrate's Court on 11th October to supplying water
unfit for human consumption. The incident involved the supply of drinking water containing the parasite Cryptosporidium hominis from the Cwellyn Water Treatment Works which resulted in 231 confirmed cases of illness in November 2005. The charges were brought by the Chief Inspector of Drinking Water under Section 70 of the Water Industry Act 1991.
The Company was fined £ 15,000 on each of 4 specimen counts (total £60,000) and ordered to pay £69,399.43 toward prosecution costs.
Professor Colbourne, commenting on the outcome of the Drinking Water Inspectorate's investigation said,
“This was a serious incident. Many consumers were affected at the time and for some, the consequences were severe. My inspectors will shortly be issuing their Incident Assessment Letter. This will record the conclusions and findings of our investigation. Dwr Cymru Welsh Water are required to respond to all recommendations
for action to prevent a recurrence. The Incident Assessment Letter will be publicly available on our website http://www.dwi.gov.uk"
She went on to say;
I am pleased to report that wider lessons have been learnt from this incident. To reduce the chance of a repetition of the mistakes made by the water supplier, Dwr Cymru, the relevant regulations are being changed."
Ed
1. Section 70 of the Water Industry Act 1991 makes it criminal offence for a water company to supply water which is unfit for human consumption. DWI investigates all drinking water quality incidents and since the Water Act 2003 can bring prosecutions in the name of the Chief Inspector of Drinking Water. There is also an arrangement between the Chief Inspector of Drinking Water and the Welsh Ministers of the Welsh Assembly
Government enabling the Chief Inspector to institute prosecutions under section 70 of the Water Industry Act 1991 on their behalf.
2.Prosecutions are taken forward where the Chief Inspector considers that there is reliable evidence that water unfit for human consumption was supplied, that the company does not have a defence that it took all reasonable steps and exercised all due diligence, and that such a prosecution is regarded as being in the public interest.
3. This prosecution follows an investigation by DWI following an outbreak of cryptosporidiosis in November 2005 in North Wales. The National Public Health Service for Wales recorded 231 confirmed cases of illness.
4. The Drinking Water Inspectorate was set up in January 1990. Its main task is to check that water undertakers
in England and Wales supply wholesome drinking water and in doing so comply with the requirements
of the Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2000 or, in relation to water undertakers whose area is wholly or mainly in Wales, the Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2001.
As a nation we can take comfort that such instances are rare - but one only has to think of the Camelford incident from the 1980s to realise that we cannot take the safety of our water supply and the precautions of our suppliers for granted. Constant vigilance is required.
Leadership in Health and Safety
Directors have taken the initiative in drawing up what is described as practical, common sense health and
safety guidelines. These will remind Directors across organisations of all sizes it is their responsibility to lead
on health and safety and establish polices and practices that make it an integral part of their culture and
values. The Health and Safety Commission (HSC) and the Institute of Directors (IoD) have published 'Leading
health and safety at work' written by directors, for directors.
Supporting the new guidance Health and Safety Minister Lord McKenzie of Luton said, "The health and
safety of employees is a moral and ethical obligation for each and every employer and this must be driven
home from Board level. Only this way will we ensure that health and safety is taken seriously. This guidance
clearly sets out the agenda for effective leadership of health and safety."
New Chair of HSC, Judith Hackitt agreed: "It is visible leadership from the top of an organisation which truly
makes for an effective health and safety culture which in turn delivers good health and safety performance
and much more. I am still confounded by the number of people who see 'health and safety' as a barrier to
doing things, as experience and evidence shows that the reverse is true. The challenge before us is changing
behaviour. This guidance makes it clear what directors need to do but it is their action and delivery
which will really count".
Director General of the IoD, Miles Templeman, added: "The Institute of Directors believes that it's vital that
board members lead the approach of their organisation to health and safety, whatever the environment
they operate in. Too often health and safety are words used as excuses by organisations that have not
developed their thinking in this area. The IoD hopes that the new guidance can help organisations integrate
health and safety into business decisions in an appropriate way, not one that stifles appropriate activity."
The guidance is written 'by directors for directors' and offers them straightforward practical advice on how
to; Plan, Deliver, Monitor and Review, health and safety in the workplace. Production of the guidance was
overseen by an IoD led steering group with nominees from the Confederation of British Industry (CBI),
Federation of Small Businesses (FSB), Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH), Local Government
Association (LGA), National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO), NHS Confederation, Trades Union
Congress (TUC) and Warwick Law School, University of Warwick
English: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg417.pdf
Ed
1. 'Leading health and safety at work' was launched at the Institute of Directors, 116 Pall Mall, London,
SW1Y 5ED on Monday 29 October 2007.
2. The IoD (Institute of Directors) was founded in 1903 and obtained a Royal Charter in 1906. The IoD is a
non-party political organisation with upwards of 52,000 members in the United Kingdom and overseas.
Membership includes directors from right across the business spectrum - from media to manufacturing, ebusiness
to the public and voluntary sectors. Members include CEOs of large corporations as well as entrepreneurial
directors of start-up companies.
4. The IoD offers a wide range of business services which include business centre facilities (including ten UK
regional centres [three in London, Reading, Bristol, Birmingham, Manchester, Nottingham, Edinburgh and
Belfast] and one each in Paris and Brussels), conferences, networking events, issues-led guides and literature,
as well as free access to business information and advisory services and a comprehensive Information
Centre. The IoD places great emphasis on director development and has established a certified qualification
for directors - Chartered Director - as well as running specific board-level and director-level training and
individual career mentoring programmes.
* In addition, the IoD provides a voice to represent the interests of its members to government and key
opinion-formers at the highest levels.
HM Revenue and Customs censured
The HSE has censured HM Revenue and Customs on 22nd October 2007, for failure to comply with a Crown Improvement Notice and failure to ensure reasonable thermal comfort in a call centre in Bathgate, West Lothian.
HM Revenue and Customs was censured under Section 33(1)(g)1 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (the HSW Act), under Regulation 7(1)2 of the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations
1992, and Section 33(1)(c) HSWA.
Whilst criminal proceedings cannot not be taken against the Crown, administrative procedures, known as Crown Censures, are used in circumstances where it is HSE's opinion that, but for Crown immunity, there would have been sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction in the courts.
This case resulted from an investigation into employee complaints about thermal comfort. HSE's investigation
found problems with the design and installation of the ventilation system, in particular the lack of effective
means to monitor relative humidity or maintain it between 40% to 70%, and that as a consequence of this and draughts from the system, many employees felt very uncomfortable.
On 30 January 2007, HSE issued a Crown Improvement Notice requiring these matters to be resolved. This was extended from an original compliance date of 9 March 2007 to 2 April 2007 at which date the Notice was not complied with. The investigation also established that HMRC failed to obtain or act upon relevant competent advice to resolve concerns over thermal comfort. Lastly the investigation determined that HMRC failed to manage the matter in a timely manner, allowing it to endure from 2004 to 2007.
HMRC acknowledged the matters and was formally censured.
Stewart Campbell, HSE Director Scotland said:
"This is an important issue for the HMRC workers in Bathgate and the problem arose from the conversion of what were industrial premises with ventilation designed for the factory process into office premises. HMRC took too long to take the matter seriously but I was pleased to hear the Department's determination now to establish improved working conditions. HSE will continue to monitor the situation".
Ed
1. Section 33(1)(g) of HSWA "it is an offence to contravene any requirement or prohibition imposed by an improvement notice or prohibition notice."
2. Regulation 7(1) of the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 requires "during working
hours, the temperature in all workplaces inside buildings shall be reasonable". The approved code of practice qualifies this by indicating that Thermal Comfort is a result of ambient temperature, air movement and relative humidity.
3. While the provisions of the HSW Act apply to Crown bodies, including departments and agencies, Crown immunity means such bodies are excluded from the provisions for statutory enforcement, including prosecution
and penalties.
4. Cabinet Office Personnel Information Note 45 (PIN 45) deals with the enforcement procedures for Crown bodies, including Crown censures. It can be found on HSE's website at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/internalops/
sectors/public/7_01_34.pdf
5. In this day and age can we as a society justify the Crown, in other words the government, escaping prosecution?
Would a criminal sanction achieve more publicity and a greater willingness to comply with law.
Don’t rain on the Parade
The new Chair of the HSC Judith Hackitt, today called for action to ensure that bureaucracy in the name of
health and safety does not needlessly interfere with Remembrance Day parades. She has written to local
authorities and others asking for their support in maintaining a proper sense of proportion in the application
of health and safety to these low risk events.
Judith Hackitt said:
"Sometimes health and safety 'requirements' are blamed for imposing unjustifiable bureaucracy on Remembrance
Day parades and commemorations. Remembrance events are very important to those involved
and unnecessary disruption can cause a great deal of offence. I do not want to see actions taken in the
name of health and safety needlessly interfering with what are generally low risk events. Most authorities
are extremely sensible on issues like this, but I thought it worth writing out to colleagues in local authorities
and others to make sure that we share a common understanding. There are obviously a few very large and
complex events that require a high degree of planning to manage the risks and make sure they go smoothly.
But the vast majority of are low risk and just require some decent planning; planning that has usually
been honed over many years."
Adding his support to the plea, Paul Coen, Chief Executive of the Local Government Association (LGA), said:
"The overwhelming majority of local authorities make proportionate and effective decisions when dealing
with events such as Remembrance Day parades. Councils have an excellent track record of ensuring the
smooth and successful running of a wide range of community events, but it is important every authority
continues to adopt a sensible approach. It only takes one inappropriate decision taken on the grounds of
health and safety to severely damage the reputation of local government amongst council taxpayers. Remembrance
Day parades are very important to many people, and it is essential that the planning processes
are handled sensibly and sensitively."
HSE & local authorities to tackle safety in warehouses
The HSE has joined forces with local authorities in Avon to tackle safety in the warehouse industry. Warehouses
can be dangerous places to work in if safety is not part of the culture. In 2003/04 the storage and
warehousing industry reported approximately 4940 work related accidents to the HSE and local authorities.
Over 615 of these accidents were classified as major injuries such as fractures and amputations.
The most common types of accidents reported were:
* Slips and trips;
* Manual handling;
* Falls from height; and
* Being hit by a falling or moving object.
In response to this, HSE and Environmental Health staff from Bristol City Council, South Gloucestershire
Council and Bath & North East Somerset Council have teamed up to organise a free event on 24 October.
The event will be suitable for people who have responsibility for health and safety in warehouses, for example
managers, supervisors and safety representatives. They will include presentations on workplace transport,
warehouse racking, warehouse safety and maintenance (which includes slips and trips and asbestos),
falls from height and manual handling.
Those attending will receive the latest health and safety information and will have the chance to talk informally
to inspectors who may be responsible for visiting their business.
Not only will the information help attendees find ways of reducing workplace injuries and lost income from
employee absence, it may also help them reduce the risk of formal action being taken against them, with
resultant fines and bad publicity.
Risk of Silicosis penalised
The HSE has warned quarrying companies and stonemasons of the risk workers face of contracting the potentially fatal disease silicosis, if adequate measures to monitor and prevent exposure to respirable crystalline
silica (RCS) are not in place. The warning comes after Robert Thomas Charlton, trading as Border Stone Quarries, of Kirkholmdale, Haltwhistle, was fined £6,000 plus £7,602 costs at Tynedale Magistrates' Court, Hexham. Mr Charlton pleaded guilty to charges, brought by HSE, of breaching: regulations 7(1) and 11(1) of the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 (as amended) - COSHH - by failing to ensure employees' exposure to RCS was adequately controlled, and failing to implement a programme of health surveillance; and regulation 5(1) of the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR) in that he failed to notify the relevant enforcing authority, in this case HSE, of a case of ill-health.
Following a routine unannounced inspection, HSE discovered that an employee had contracted silicosis. HSE Inspector Andrea Robbins said: "Breathing in the very fine dust of crystalline silica can lead to the development of silicosis, which in its most acute form can result in premature death. It is vital employers monitor dust levels to assess the risk of exposure of employees to RCS, and that they put control measures in place to reduce the levels to which employees are exposed, and consequently reduce their risk of developing
silicosis. Andrea Robbins continued: "It is an offence to not report a case of silicosis to the enforcing authority. This case only became apparent after an unannounced routine inspection was carried out at this site. This prosecution serves to publicise the need for employers to be vigilant in identifying substances in their business which can affect workers' health. In particular, companies who generate stone dust, which contains silica, should take precautions to protect their employees' health. Trades most at risk include stonemasons and quarry workers."
Ed:
Crystalline silica (also known as quartz) is found in most kinds of rock, sands, clays, shale and gravel. Workers
exposed to fine dust containing quartz are at risk of developing a chronic and possibly severely disabling lung disease known as "silicosis". In addition to silicosis, there is now evidence that heavy and prolonged workplace exposure to dust containing crystalline silica can lead to an increased risk of lung cancer. The evidence
suggests that this increased risk is likely to occur only in those workers who have developed silicosis.
Regulation 7(1) of the COSHH Regulations places a duty on an employer to ensure that the exposure of his employees to hazardous substances is either prevented or, where this is not reasonably practicable, adequately
controlled.
Regulation 11(1) states that where it is appropriate for the protection of the health of his employees who are, or are liable to be, exposed to a hazardous substance, the employer shall ensure that such employees are under suitable health surveillance.
Regulation 5(1) of RIDDOR states that where a person at work suffers from any specified occupational disease and his work involves a specified activity the responsible person (usually the employer) must send a report to the relevant enforcing authority as soon as they have received a written diagnosis from a registered
medical practitioner.
CO awareness tour starts in Runcorn
A Runcorn mother of four whose family have all suffered from the effects of carbon monoxide poisoning is leading a campaign to raise awareness of the danger. Lynn Griffiths launched the awareness tour on Monday
15 October at the House of Lords with the HSE’s Chief Executive Geoffey Podger. The campaign was previewed at an event in Runcorn on Friday morning 12 October where Lynn - whose family of six, including her late husband, have all suffered the effects of carbon monoxide poisoning - will be available for interview
from 10.45 a.m. along with an HSE Inspector.
The Trust has provided ongoing support for Lynne's Runcorn-based CO-Awareness organisation and this event launches a week-long UK tour to highlight the dangers of the symptoms of CO poisoning not being recognised. HSE North West Regional Director David Ashton said: "Carbon monoxide poisoning is senseless.
You can't see it, hear it, taste it, or even smell carbon monoxide (CO), yet every year it kills around 20-30 people. The symptoms can be mistaken for influenza, so don't become an unwitting victim. If you are becoming a tenant of rented property, ask your landlord for your gas safety certificate. He is required by law to show it to you so you know your gas appliances have been serviced annually."
Ed - If you are renting property then by law your landlord must:
* Ensure that gas appliances, flues and associated gas pipe work etc are maintained, in a safe condition, by a CORGI Registered installer.
* Have an annual safety check carried out, by a CORGI Registered installer, on each gas appliance that they own in the properties that they let.
* Provide you with a copy of the record before you move in and within 28 days of each subsequent annual check being performed.
If a managing agent lets your property, ensure the contract stipulates who is responsible for carrying out the above checks. It is unlawful for anyone to carry out gas fitting work, in domestic or commercial premises,
as a business unless they are registered with the Council for Registered Gas Installers (CORGI). It is also unlawful for anyone to claim that they are CORGI registered when they are not.
All genuine gas fitters expect to be asked to produce their CORGI registration ID card before being invited into your property. The information on the card is also printed in Braille.
Apart from checking the identification details on the front of the card also check the expiry date to ensure the fitters registration is still current. On the back of the card check the list of work categories to ensure the fitter is competent to perform the job you need doing.
Gas fitter fined £1,500
Craig Isherwood pleaded guilty to breaching Section 7(a) HSWA 1974 and was fined £1,500 and ordered to pay costs of £1,500 at Manchester Minshull Street Crown Court. Mr Isherwood had been employed to visit the premises in Lowry Walk, Bolton on 20 December 2005 to carry out the Landlord's Gas Safety Inspection on behalf of the council house management company Bolton at Home Ltd, but had failed to recognise that the Valliant water heater in the kitchen was gas powered. After not being inspected or serviced, the boiler failed catastrophically on 10 January 2006 resulting in carbon monoxide fumes that affected 14 members of the extended Kara and Mohammed families, two of whom were detained in hospital overnight.
HSE Inspector Sandra Tomlinson who investigated the incident, said: "An omission such as this could have led to one or more fatalities. Mr Isherwood has five years experience and is a registered CORGI engineer which gives him a higher duty of care than a lay person and as such the highest standards are expected of him. This is an exeptional case on which HSE has felt it necessary to take action but HSE still recommends that you ensure that any work carried out in relation to gas appliances in domestic or commercial premises is to be undertaken by a CORGI-registered installer, competent in that area of work - all of which reflects the seriousness of Mr Isherwood's error."
Asbestos Prosecution
Bloom Environmental Ltd of Loughborough of Lea Hall Enterprise Park, Wheelhouse Road, Rugeley, were fined £12,000 and costs of £3,750 at Halesowen Magistrates' Court on Tuesday 2 October 2007. The prosecution
follows a routine inspection by the HSE of a business premises in Stourbridge Road, Halesowen, where employees of Bloom Environmental Ltd were removing asbestos on 23 November 2006, as the building
was being prepared for demolition. The HSE inspector found that five of the company's employees were not taking proper precautions, contravening Regulations 7,11,16,17 and 23 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006. The inspector issued a Prohibition Notice, stopping the work.
Prosecuting HSE Inspector, Tony Woodward said:
"Breathing in asbestos fibres can lead to asbestos-related disease, which kills over 3,500 people a year - more than any other single work-related illness. The disease can take many more years to develop and individuals will not be immediately aware of a change in someone's health after inhalation of asbestos. Employers involved in this field of work have a responsibility for the safety of their employees, and we are working with the industry to ensure high standards to protect health are achieved."
Ed
1. Bloom Environmental Ltd was charged with five offences under the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006. The regulations contravened were:
Regulation 7 (1) which requires an employer to prepare a suitable written plan of work detailing how work is to be carried out before it is undertaken.
Regulation 11(1)(b) which requires that where it is not reasonably practicable to prevent exposure to asbestos,
an employer shall take measures necessary to reduce the exposure of his employees to asbestos to the lowest level reasonably practicable by measures other than the use of respiratory protective equipment.
Regulation 13(1) requires an employer to ensure that control measures provided meet to the requirements of the Regulations, shall in the case of plant and equipment be adequately maintained.
Regulation 16 which requires that where it is not reasonably practicable to prevent the spread of asbestos, every employer shall reduce it to the lowest level that is reasonably practicable.
Regulation 17 which requires every employer who undertakes work that exposes his employees to asbestos shall ensure that the relevant premises and plant are kept in a clean condition.
Asbestos Exposures
Mr Mustaq Bargit, trading as M and B Builders, of Victoria Road, Fulwood, was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £5,137.73 after being found guilty at Preston Magistrates Court to a charge under HSWA Section 3(1), after he allowed work on a construction site to continue before an asbestos survey was completed.
During a visit, HSE Inspectors became concerned that asbestos was present in a building that Mr Bargit's company was working on. This was later confirmed.
HSE Inspector Joanne Eccles said: "All contractors have a duty to ensure people's health and safety. In this instance Mr Bargit had been made aware of the possible presence of asbestos but failed to take the proper precautions necessary to deal with this danger. Asbestos is the greatest single cause of work-related death in this country. Asbestos is only dangerous when disturbed so if possible it should be managed and contained.
The HSE has produced straight forward advice to building occupiers, contractors and workers on how to avoid the dangers of asbestos. Any substantial renovation work should only be started after a full asbestos survey has been carried out." Two workers from another company were exposed to asbestos.
High-pressure hydrogen testing facility
The Health and Safety Laboratory (HSL) has unveiled a new high-pressure hydrogen testing system at its 550 acre site in Buxton, Derbyshire. The unique testing facility is a major investment for the laboratory and recognises the new safety challenges presented by using hydrogen as an alternative fuel.
As a clean fuel with zero carbon emissions, hydrogen is widely seen as the future's premier energy carrier and has been used safely for many years as an industrial gas by the aerospace and chemical industries.
The launch of the experimental hydrogen compression/release facility took place on Tuesday 9 October and was organised to coincide with a meeting being hosted at HSL of the HySafe European Network of Excellence
(NoE). The facility exceeds all current technologies with an unrivalled capability to test hydrogen systems up to pressures of 1000bar.
It also provides flexibility to investigate all foreseeable high-pressure hydrogen applications ranging from refuelling and bulk storage to component and materials testing.
Over 50 representatives from more than 30 organisations with key roles in research and development of hydrogen technology were welcomed to the event by HSL's Chief Executive, Eddie Morland.
After presentations from HySafe NoE Co-ordinator Thomas Jordan and HSL's Head of Explosion Safety, Dr Stuart Hawksworth, the guests were shown specially filmed footage of preliminary high-pressure tests using
the facility. The visitors were then escorted to the testing pad to see the system up close.
Dr Hawksworth said:
"This unique facility allows us to conduct tests at greater pressures than were previously available. It enhances
our capability to conduct and support the research needed to enable a safe hydrogen economy.
'We already have contracts in place for hydrogen tests from the European Commission, the UK Government and Industry and we are also in discussion with several other organisations regarding future work for the facility."
Hysafe NoE Co-ordinator, Thomas Jordan commended the new facility which he said 'would contribute enormously to achieving HySafe's goal to promote public awareness and trust in hydrogen technology.'
Ed-.
HySafe (http://www. Hysafe.org) is an EC funded Network of Excellence which focuses on safety issues relevant to improve and co-ordinate the knowledge and understanding of hydrogen safety. Hysafe was set up in 2004 with a project duration of 5 years. It aims to support the safe and efficient introduction and commercialisation of hydrogen as an energy carrier of the future, including the related hydrogen applications.
The overall goal of HySafe is to contribute to the safe transition to a more sustainable development in Europe by facilitating the safe introduction of hydrogen technologies and applications.
The network brings together competencies and experience from various research and industrial fields (automotive,
gas and oil, chemical and nuclear). The consortium consists of 25 partners including
* Research organisations
* governmental agencies
* universities
* industry
Father & son roofers prosecuted
Dean Soley and his father George, trading as D&G Soley, pleaded guilty to two breaches of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 by ignoring the obviously high level of danger to themselves and others. They were each fined £500 and a total of £1,000 costs imposed at Kidderminster Magistrates' Court on 4 October
2007 after failing to ensure that no material or object was thrown or tipped from height, where it was liable to cause personal injury and for failing to take measures to prevent any person falling from the roof where they were working.
On 3 April 2007, three people were observed working on the roof of a commercial building in Waterloo Street Kidderminster and standing close to an unprotected drop while throwing large items of debris into a unprotected skip, approximately 30ft (10m) below, alongside the pavement where pedestrians were passing.
The case was brought by the HSE after a prohibition notice had been served for all roof work to cease. Such was the high degree of danger to the public and to those working that the prosecution was pursued.
Speaking after the case HSE Inspector Katharine Walker said:
"Each year people continue to lose their lives or suffer injury due to failure to ensure safe working at height. The risks from falls from even short distances are well known so those in charge of work at height should ensure that they, their employees and others are protected. In this case, it would have been relatively inexpensive
to put protective rails on the roof, a chute for debris and a covering over the skip with surrounded fencing to protect the public. If left to carry on the roof work the court case against the Soleys could so easily, like many others, have involved a fatality or serious injury. It seems incredible that, in this day and age, the dangers were abundantly clear to concerned onlookers yet those supposedly professionally engaged
in work were willing to flout important safety legislation where they should have automatically provided
suitable protection. The Soleys should be thankful that the vigilance of bystanders and HSE inspectors did not allow their practices to end in tragedy."
Ed -
1. Regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 states: "Where work is carried out at height, every employer shall take suitable and sufficient measures to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, any person falling a distance liable to cause personal injury."
2. Regulation 10(3) of the work at Height regulations 2005 states: "Every employer shall ensure that no material or object is thrown or tipped from height in circumstances where it is liable to cause injury to any person."
3. In 2005/06 a total of 46 workers died and a further 3351 employees suffered major injury as a result of a fall from height in the workplace. Many of these incidents could be avoided using the right equipment and taking simple precautions.
4. The Work at Height Regulations 2005 came into force on 6 April 2005. Regulations introduce a hierarchy for use when planning and risk assessing work at height. Duty holders should consider how to avoid work at height. If this is not possible, they should take steps to prevent a fall occurring. Where they cannot prevent a fall, they should take steps to minimise the distance and consequences of a fall.
5. A ladder should only be used where a risk assessment demonstrates that the task is low risk and of short duration, or where there are existing features on site that cannot be altered and the use of other equipment
is not practical. Such features include restricted space preventing other equipment from being put in place correctly or ground conditions that mean that there is no suitable area to set up alternative equipment.
6. 4. HSE has published a brief guide to the Work at Height Regulations 2005 http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg401.pdf .
Confronting Mental Illness stigma
One in four people will personally experience a mental condition in their life, but more than half are too embarrassed to tell their employer, a new survey reveals. Mental illness is increasing in the UK. It is the fastest growing cause of sick leave and the economic cost is vast; some 13 million working days are lost every year due to stress, depression, and anxiety, costing businesses £3 billion.
Work and Pensions Minister Lord McKenzie and Health Minister Ivan Lewis have called on businesses to tackle the stigma attached to mental health conditions in the workplace, and launched a practical managers'
guide containing advice on how to support their staff.
Lord McKenzie said:
"Businesses must stop burying their heads in the sand. The pressures of today's global economy mean that we will all encounter mental ill health at work; whether in ourselves or a colleague. The personal and business costs of ignoring these issues are immense and can no longer be ignored. But there is still a taboo on talking about mental illness at work. Fear and ignorance are the biggest barriers which stop this being brought out into the open. Many people are scared of telling their employer about their condition. And employers perhaps don't know how to handle and so avoid addressing these issues. Legislation offers
protection and we will do all we can to support businesses, but we recognise that it is the managers at the coalface who make the real difference. We know there has been a shortage of information and advice about how to handle mental illness at work, which is why we have today launched this managers' handbook.
Employers must recognise the need and benefit of facing-up to their responsibility to support their staff, or face ever increasing sick leave and loss of talent. I now call on businesses to haul this problem into the open; to connect with their staff, and hammer home to their company the benefits of addressing these issues; increased engagement and productivity, retention of talent, and reduced sick leave and recruitment costs. Investment in this area makes a huge difference on many levels."
The survey revealed that 8 out of 10 respondents believed work can help people recover from mental illness.
Three quarters thought that employers focus too much on what people with a mental health condition
cannot do, instead of what they can do. 80% felt that employers have a responsibility to provide care and support to employees with mental health conditions.
Health Minister Ivan Lewis said:
"Millions of people suffer from stress, depression and anxiety which blight their lives and costs the economy
billions in lost working days for years. Many people are unnecessarily forced to give up their jobs because of mental health problems, which represents a terrible waste of talent for British business.
"I believe that this report will help employers to provide better support to their staff who develop mental
health problems in the workplace by encouraging people to talk about problems. Both businesses and employees benefit from tackling these issues, staff feel supported while businesses benefit from reduced sickness absence and improved."
Tackling mental health problems in the workplace is a priority for this Government. The handbook has been developed by Shift, the Government's programme to reduce the stigma and discrimination directed towards
people with mental health problems. The initiative is supported by the Health Work and Well-being strategy, a groundbreaking partnership between the Department for Work and Pensions, Department of Health, and the Health & Safety Executive.
Save the environment - cut red tape!
Businesses will supposedly find it simpler and less costly to be environmentally responsible under new environmental
permit regulations. Environmental permits are required for industrial and waste activities which could harm human health or the environment unless they are controlled.
A single environmental permit will be introduced under the Environmental Permitting Programme from April 2008, combining and streamlining the previous waste management licence (WML) and pollution prevention
and control (PPC) systems.
Environment Minister Joan Ruddock said:
"This is a very welcome commonsense move. It will increase clarity and cut the administrative burden for a number of organisations without compromising the existing high standards of protection for the environment
and human health. Cutting red tape also means regulators will be able to spend more time pursuing the minority of operators who deliberately flout the rules."
Defra, the Welsh Assembly Government and the Environment Agency consulted on the changes last year. The new system is expected to bring a number of benefits, including:
* A simpler permit application process with less paperwork;
* Much clearer guidance; and
* More flexibility for businesses to make changes.
The new Environmental Permitting Regulations combine over 40 separate legal instruments into a single set of regulations, reducing them to less than a third of the length. It is estimated that industry and regulators could see cost savings of around £76 million over ten years.
The new system has a number of features, including replacing several permits with a single site based environmental
permit, and a new 'standard rules' permit for lower risk waste activities. Standard rules permits are being developed in consultation with industry and will be published by the Environment Agency well before the new system comes into force. Planning controls will continue to apply parallel to activities covered
by the new permits, ensuring the continued protection of the public and local communities.
When the new system comes into effect all existing WML or PPC permits will automatically become environmental
permits. Outstanding applications will become environmental permits if the application is granted.
Ed -
A leaflet outlining the new regime is available on the EPP pages of the Defra website at http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/ppc/index.htm
The Environmental Permitting Programme is a joint Better Regulation initiative with the Environment Agency and the Welsh Assembly Government.
The Environment Agency and local authorities will enforce the new regime across England and Wales.
More information is available:
* on the EPP website http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/epp
* in the General Guidance Manual for local authority regulated sites http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/
ppc
* on the Environment Agency's website http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk
* on the LACORS website http://www.lacors.gov.uk
Tackling fly-tipping scouse style!
Minister for waste Joan Ruddock has urged local authorities to bring themselves up to the level of the best in tackling fly-tipping as she published new figures. The “Flycapture” results for April 2006 to March 2007, show more fly-tipping incidents are being reported and more action is being taken to tackle them.
The results, covering 354 English authorities, show an increase in incidents over the past year, however, nearly half of all cases reported came from Liverpool City Council!
Key results include:
* Local Authorities in England reported that they had dealt with more than 2.6 million incidents of fly-tipping
- up five per cent on 2005-06. 1,289,410 incidents were reported by Liverpool City Council!
* Enforcement action taken by local authorities, excluding Liverpool City Council, increased by 46 per cent to 357,829 cases. The figure for all authorities, including Liverpool City Council, was 16 per cent.
* Half of all fly-tips recorded involved single black bags and it is estimated that the majority of these occurred
in back alleys and involved waste placed out for collection incorrectly, primarily in Liverpool. However,
when Liverpool City Council is excluded, 48 per cent of all recorded fly-tips occurred on the highway and 53 per cent of fly-tips were of a car boot or small van load in size.
* 77 per cent of fly-tips involved household waste - a 5.4 per cent increase on 2005-06. Once Liverpool City Council is excluded, 56 per cent of all fly-tips involve household waste - a 10 per cent increase on 2005-06.
Ms Ruddock said:
"Despite some good progress over the past year - including more reporting and more enforcement - there is far too much fly-tipping blighting our streets and countryside. It's not acceptable, councils must do more to tackle it. Councils as diverse as Sheffield, Worthing and Milton Keynes are driving down fly-tipping through targeted, concerted action. I want other councils to follow their lead. Government has a role to play in this by continuing to provide and update the tools and guidance to enable action to be taken. And the public and businesses must also play a part by reporting incidents and dealing with their waste responsibly.
In short, we can only clean up our streets by all working together."
The Government published its Waste Strategy for England 2007 in May, which set out a blueprint for not only recycling and reusing waste, but also preventing it in the first place. The strategy makes it clear that initiatives to boost recycling should be supported by fly-tipping strategies aimed at preventing the illegal dumping of waste. Decisions about the most appropriate household waste collection services are a matter for local authorities, not central Government according to Ministers!
Ed - ongoing work by government includes:
* Reviewing legislation on the controls that are in place to deal with the management and carriage of waste. The review aims to reduce levels of fly-tipping, make it easier for businesses to understand and comply
with the regulations and make them easier for local authorities to use.
* Developing legislation that will give local authorities and the Environment Agency the powers to stop, search and instantly seize vehicles being used to commit fly-tipping offences.
* Working to better understand how small businesses and householders deal with waste and the types of awareness raising campaigns that would most effectively reach these groups.
* Continuing to fund the Environment Agency's targeted campaigns to disseminate good practice to businesses
and raise awareness of good waste management practices.
* Funding the Environment Agency to develop Flycapture Enforcement, a training programme aimed at local
authority officers and their legal teams to increase knowledge of the relevant legislation and to develop skills in effective enforcement and prosecution of fly-tipping. Environmental charity, ENCAMs and the Chartered
Institution of Waste Management (CIWM) have joined up to co-ordinate the delivery of the package throughout England and Wales.
It is estimated that local authorities are spending £24.6 million on enforcement action against fly-tipping. Excluding Liverpool City Council, the figure is £17.8 million. This is the first year that data on enforcement spend have been available.
* Excluding Liverpool City Council, fly tips of commercial waste black bags have fallen by 10 per cent on 2005-06 from 59,630 to 53,566.
* The number of inspections carried out by local authorities to check that businesses are dealing with their waste responsibility has increased from 12,450 in 2005-06 to 25,745 in 2006-07.
* Local authorities carried out 1,371 prosecutions in 2006-07, of which 94 per cent achieved a successful outcome.
* 93 per cent of fly-tipping takes place in predominantly urban authorities where 63 per cent of people in England live. Excluding Liverpool City Council, 88 per cent of fly-tipping takes place in predominantly urban authorities.
Ed -
1. Full Flycapture results for 2006/07, broken down by local authority area, are available at http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/localenv/flytipping/flycapture.htm
2. Flycapture is the national database of fly-tipping incidents and enforcement action that was set up by Defra, the Environment Agency and the Local Government Association to record the incidents and cost of illegally dumped waste dealt with by local authorities.
3. 323 local authorities in England (91%) entered 12 separate monthly returns to the Flycapture database between April 2006 and March 2007 and 345 authorities (97 per cent) submitted at least 10 monthly returns
in this period. This represents an increase for the third consecutive year and reinforces the successful uptake and use of the database as a management information source.
4. The Environment Agency is responsible for dealing with more serious cases of illegal waste disposal. Data from illegal dumping dealt with by the Environment Agency is currently being analysed and will be published
in due course.
5. A recent survey by the Environment Agency reveals 48% of businesses have introduced practical measures
to reduce environmental harm, an increase of 17% on 2005. Further details can be found at http://www.netregs.gov.uk/commondata/acrobat/smenvironment07uk_1856733.pdf
6. The Government’s action plan on illegal waste activity is included at Annex F to its Waste Strategy for England 2007. Details can be found at http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/strategy/strategy07/index.htm
7. Examples of good practice in tackling fly-tipping among local authorities include:
Milton Keynes Council
Milton Keynes has seen a 35 per cent reduction in fly-tipping incidents in 2006-07 from 3,511 to 2,252. Staff numbers on the enforcement team have increased, Flycapture data has been used to identify hotspots and covert surveillance has been carried out at them, leading to prosecutions, penalty notices and cautions. Opening hours have also been extended at civic amenity sites.
Worthing Borough Council
Worthing has seen a 33 per cent reduction in fly-tipping incidents in 2006-07 from 2,248 to 1,484. Following
data showing that fly-tipping problems were centred around household black bag waste in or around properties with poor storage, the council installed street bins for these properties and issued residents with notices requiring them to use the bins. Checks were carried out with all businesses in the surrounding areas to ensure that commercial waste was not dumped in the bins.
Marine Accident Investigation Branch report - Lyme View Marina fatality, Addlington, Cheshire - January 2007
At about 0245 on 20 January 2007, a fire broke out on board the narrowboat Lindy Lou which was moored at Lyme View Marina, Adlington. One person died as a result of the inferno, which quickly swept through the boat. The other occupant, the owner of the boat, suffered from serious burns and effects of smoke inhalation.
It was a cold, wet and windy night. The interior of the boat was cosy when the couple arrived back on board, and the owner added some more fuel to the stove to keep the boat warm overnight. They opened a bottle of vodka, and drank this between them before going to bed.
During the night, the owner woke and found the air in the boat to be extremely warm and stuffy. He got up to open the double hatch doors on the starboard side of the boat to let some air in, and then also opened the aft door. Having stepped outside onto the aft deck to cool off, he became aware of an orange glow from the forward external covered deck, and walked along the towpath to investigate. As he approached, he realised that the canopy was burning, and that flames seemed to be emanating from inside the boat. He turned to go back aft, and at the same time, the forward port window shattered and flames leapt out of the saloon.
Despite his desperate attempts, the owner was unable to re-enter the boat, and as his girlfriend had not appeared, he ran to a nearby boat to seek help. A "999" call was made and the first of three fire engines arrived on scene at 0302, and the fire was extinguished by 0319. The body of his girlfriend was later discovered
in the bathroom area, and a postmortem established that she had died from the inhalation of smoke and fumes.
The boat had been extensively damaged during the fire, which had burnt fiercely and quickly. The most likely cause of the fire was the solid fuel stove, which had not been installed in accordance with the stove manufacturer's recommendations, as the hearth dimensions, and the air gaps around the stove were less than recommended. It is possible that either an ember fell onto the nylon carpet in the saloon when the stove was stoked, or that there was radiant heat transfer from the stove and its flue to a nearby combustible
item (e.g. a beanbag, a book propped up near the hearth, or a plastic loudspeaker that was attached to the wall behind the flue). Evidence was also found of possible long-term charring of the wooden hearth structure beneath the tiles, and this structure might have also ignited to cause the fire.
The investigation has identified that, although British Standards are available for the installation of solid fuel stoves and flues in buildings, park homes and transportable accommodation units, there is no such standard for their installation on boats. A draft proposal for a new standard to address this omission is currently
being developed by the British Standards Institution (BSi).
No smoke alarms were fitted on Lindy Lou. The Recreational Craft Directive (RCD) EN ISO 9094, and the
Boat Safety Scheme (BSS) do not currently require these to be fitted to recreational craft. The BSS has now
also strongly recommended that boats with overnight accommodation are fitted with at least one suitable
and effective smoke alarm.
A recommendation has been made to the British Standards Institution to propose a change to the current
ISO standards so that smoke alarms are required to be fitted on habitable small craft.
ACTION TAKEN
Following the accident, various actions have been taken by organisations involved both directly and indirectly
in this accident. These include: The Boat Safety Scheme (BSS) has:
* Issued a statement on its website (http://www.boatsafetyscheme.com) confirming that it now strongly
recommends the fitting of at least one suitable and effective smoke alarm to boats with overnight accommodation.
It has also published guidelines regarding the choice and positioning of suitable alarm types on
its website.
The British Marine Federation (BMF) has:
* Confirmed its intention to support the BSS initiative regarding smoke alarms in its quarterly technical
report and the trade publication 'Boating Business'.
Triton Boat Fitters has:
* Commenced fitting smoke alarms on all its new boats.
* Replaced the plywood, used as the tile-facing material in their stove hearths, with a fire barrier material.
* Confirmed its intention to install oil fired central heating, where possible, to replace solid fuel stoves.
Cheshire Fire & Rescue Service has:
* Confirmed its intention to introduce a Boat Fire Safety check scheme similar to that already underway
with Warwickshire Fire & Rescue Service. This scheme is intended to help boat owners understand the on
board hazards of fire, and identify simple preventative actions that can reduce the risk. The Association of
Waterways Cruising Clubs has:
* Recommended to its member clubs, through its magazine and website, that all boaters should fit smoke
alarms and CO detectors to their boats and should consult their local Fire & Rescue service for technical
advice.
* Issued a press release containing the same recommendation to the waterways press.
The National Water Safety Forum has:
* Continued to develop, through its REMTECH (Rescue Emergency Technical) group, a new web-based UK
water-related incident database to replace INREM and other databases.
The CEN (European Committee for Standardization10) Consultant RCD has:
* Raised the issue of fire protection for solid fuel stoves and the substrate material being suitably fire resistant
or protected from heat in the EN ISO 9094 standards, during the June 2007 ISO Plenary Working Group
Meeting.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The British Standards Institution is recommended to: 2007/183 Propose to the International Standards
Organisation that BS EN ISO 9094 Parts 1 and 2 should be reviewed regarding the fitting of smoke alarms on
habitable small craft.
Faulty Ladder causes fall
Gazelle Steam Cleaning Services Ltd of Rosewood Farm on Liverpool Road, Hutton has pleaded guilty at Macclesfield Magistrates' Court to a breach of Section 2(1) HSWA. The company was fined £7,000 and ordered to pay £14,257 costs. The conviction followed the fall of an employee - a Gary Jaundrill - who fell approximately 3m three metres from a faulty ladder. He has suffered permanent disability.
As a result of the fall on 3 February 2006 at a housing constriction site on Robin Lane, Macclesfield, Mr Jaundrill suffered serious spinal injuries in addition to internal injuries and cuts. He has been left with two rods and eight screws in his back, psychiatric problems, constant pain and many continuing disabilities. He cannot work, and his condition is said to be still deteriorating.
Gazelle specialises in cleaning brick and stone and was carrying out brick cleaning work as a sub contractor on the Macclesfield site
At the time of Mr. Jaundrill's fall he was standing on the seventh rung near to the top of an aluminium ladder
power washing brickwork he had treated with acid. The accident occurred because the ladder on which he had been working suffered from acid corrosion to such an extent that it snapped in two.
Speaking after the case HSE Construction Inspector Rob Hodkinson said: "Gazelle prepared a method statement
that referred only to the use of scaffold with no mention of ladders. It failed to give its workers proper instructions or training for the use and care of ladders whilst brick washing. The company's system (or lack of one) permitted workers to use ladders that were regularly exposed to the corrosive effect of hydrochloric acid without the ladders being the subject of rigorous and regular checking for corrosion (and other faults).
The method of work exposed workers to risks associated with the use of hydrochloric acid. The company required the workers to work in teams of two rather than three without ensuring that if ladders were to be used they were to be footed or secured. What happened was foreseeable and there was much that was reasonably practicable that could have been done to ensure safety. Indeed, the company took steps to improve its system after the accident had occurred."
Mr Jaundrill's two man team would scrape off excess mortar from the building then wash the brickwork with dilute hydrochloric acid which would be applied with the use of a watering can and then power washed to remove the acid from the walls of the house. This was a hazardous job because of the use of acid and the potential for burn and eye injuries for those who might be splashed with acid, particularly if standing below the point of application such as when footing a ladder.
Rob Hodkinson added: "No-one saw Gary Jaundrill fall, but having done so he was seriously injured and helpless. He couldn't move his arms or legs and he couldn't call for help - he had to wait until someone came upon him. Eventually, his colleagues did so, called for the emergency services and put him in the recovery
position. He was taken to hospital where he remained for four weeks before being discharged home but in need of extensive care."
Ed - Statistics reveal that a third of all fall from height incidents involve ladders or stepladders and such incidents account for an average of 14 deaths and 1200 major injuries to workers each year.