As well as safety and violence, a massive 40% of companies were revealed to have responded to the recession by cutting their cleaning and maintenance budgets. Supporting this were the responses from 28% of employees who said their workplace was dirty, with 50% adding that they found the lack of cleanliness embarrassing when clients and customers visited.

When asked what improvements they would make to their workplace, 45% of employees said they would bring in more natural light to improve productivity. Esther Wassmann, managing director of Resource GB, said: “From the results it is clear that the cuts made to cleaning and maintenance budgets are having an impact on the workforce and could be impacting on the health of employees as well as putting off potential customers at a time when every business should be trying its utmost to attract new business.”

Copyright © Press Association 2010

One of the ways in which organisations can get a decisive pay-back from good health and safety management is by maintaining positive morale and making sure their people are health, safe – and happy! Conversely poor morale leads to poor productivity.  So what’s going wrong here?  A failure to effectively consult with staff? A failure to act? A failure to listen? Something that is continuously cited in prosecutions for failures in health and safety compliance is a lack of health and safety CULTURE. You won’t find that word in any statute book, but paradoxically, it is probably the most important factor in good safety management.

The accident occurred at the Southern Avenue Industrial Estate, Leominster. An ambulance service vehicle, an ambulance crew and the Midlands Air Ambulance from Cosford were called to the scene.

The man, in his 30s, was taken to Selly Oak Hospital in Birmingham for treatment to a serious injury to his right leg,.

A West Midlands Ambulance Service spokesman said: “The ambulance crew assessing the man, who is in his 30s, requested the attendance of the Midlands Air Ambulance due to the severity of the injury and the distance to travel to Selly Oak Hospital for the necessary treatment.

“The skip had been lifted off the man’s leg by other workers at the site. Crews lifted the patient into the helicopter. He had a serious injury to his right leg and was in a stable condition. He was flown to Selly Oak Hospital in Birmingham for further assessment and treatment.

“Considering the weight of a fully loaded skip, it is fortunate the leg injury wasn’t even more serious.”

Questions: Why was this guy in a position where this could have happened? Was there a risk assessment? Was there a method statement? Had he read and understood them?  Was he being supervised?  Had he been trained?  Was there any evidence of any of this? The questions go on – and on……  Call us for some advice and guidance, we’ll be pleased to help.

The guidance, drawn up by The Sentencing Guidelines Council (SGC), states that those found guilty of corporate manslaughter should rarely face fines under £500,000.

Other health and safety offences that cause death should command fines which start at £100,000, it said.

The guidelines said the level of fine should not be influenced by the impact on shareholders and directors, nor consider the cost of complying with other sanctions.

However, the financial circumstances of the offending firm should be taking into account when deciding the level of fine, as should the effect on the firm’s employees and provision of services to the public, the SGC said.

Factors such as the forseeability of serious injury, whether non-compliance was common and widespread in the firm, and how high up the company responsibility for the breach went, could increase the seriousness of the offence, it said.

The guidelines come into effect from 15 February.

Corporate responsibility for safety starts right at the top in your organisation, but that doesn’t mean individual tasks and responsibilities cannon be delegated – in fact they should – via appropriately trained line management.  We can help to implement a correctly managed safety system for you.  We also recommend it’s done before that critical accident rather than after it……….

Effective safety planning for your organization is paramount, changes in these guidelines highlights the need for effective safety management in the workplace, contact us before its too late.

Health and Safety Executive inspectors carried out checks at construction sites in Manchester, Salford and Trafford and issued a total of 56 enforcement notices at 42 sites. The action meant either work was stopped immediately or in some cases improvements had to be made. Some of the companies involved could face prosecution.

Nearly half of the enforcement notices were due to unsafe work being carried out at height. Other issues included excessive dust and inadequate ventilation or failure to provide masks, dangerous electrics and the general state of sites.

New figures from the HSE show there were 498 serious injuries and one death on construction sites in Greater Manchester in 2009. There were also 45 serious injuries and one death in Warrington. The intensive two-day inspections took place as part of a month-long initiative aimed at stopping dangerous practices on building sites across the country.

The national inspection initiative is focusing on refurbishment, including roofing work. Inspectors are making unannounced visits to ensure that sites are managing refurbishment work, including work at height safely and that sites are in good order.

Polly Tomlinson, the HSE’s Principal Inspector for Construction in Greater Manchester, said: “We will continue to make unannounced visits to sites, and take enforcement action when necessary, until the message gets across. It simply isn’t worth taking risks to try and save money.”

“What jumps out at me is that ‘Nearly half of the enforcement notices were due to unsafe work being carried out at height.’  First, let’s be clear about what constitutes  ‘Work at height’.  It  is a place where there is the potential for a person to fall a distance and possibly sustain injury including a place at or below ground level; or whilst obtaining access to or egress from such place while at work, except by a staircase in a permanent workplace.  Once we’re clear about this, what follows is a risk assessment and implementation of measures to control the risk of falls.  Guys – this is not rocket science.  If your people are not applying the right rules on site – as stated in risk assessments and method statements – it should be a disciplinary matter with yellow and red cards being used to focus minds.  We specialise in site checks and audits to provide feedback and help our clients.  If we can help let me know” Tom Searle, Britrisk Safety.

Britrisk specialize in working within the construction sector to continually improve best working practices, site risk and safety assessments, call us for more details.

The city council has ordered the “decorative surface” to be removed after complaints from parents they had cut their hands on the shards of glass. The park has been closed until urgent work has been carried out, the council added.

The Diamond Hall Pocket Park, designed to be “minimalist”, has been criticised by parents for its lack of play facilities. Parents hoped the council’s £70,000 would be put towards traditional facilities such as climbing frames and swings, but instead they were provided with concrete block ‘play features’.

Julie Gray, Head of Community Services, said: “The city council is working with the landscape designers, the main contractor and their specialist sub contractor, who laid the surface, to resolve the recent problem.

“Contractors were due on site this morning to remove the decorative surface which will be replaced as soon as possible.

“Health and safety at all our parks and play areas is of paramount concern and all reports of public concern are taken seriously.

“We hope that once it is completed Millfield Pocket Park will become another valuable community asset successfully provided through the Play Pathfinder project.”

It’s often stated that safety compliance is just a cost burden, but in this instance an increased level of safety awareness would have prevented unnecessary expenditure.

Bow Street Garage, in Rugeley, Staffordshire had been warned that its Powrmatic gas heater posed serious safety issues for customers and workers, and residents living in the connected buildings.

The HSA found that deadly carbon monoxide fumes could be released into the workshop through the heater’s exhaust flue which was directed inside the building.

Stafford Magistrates’ Court heard how, on 3 December 2009, an inspector from the HSE issued the company with a Prohibition Notice requiring it to stop using the heater. As well as problems with the flue, the electrical wiring system was unsuitable and the system required servicing by a competent gas engineer.

When the inspector returned to the site a month later, he noticed the workshop was noticeably warmer than outside. As soon as one of the directors of the company, Ian Moore, recognised the inspector, he switched the heater off. Mr Moore claimed it had been on for no more than 45 minutes in order to help dry the workshop floor that had just been mopped after an oil spillage.

Bow Street Garage Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Section 33(1)(g) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. It escaped any further action because it has now ceased trading.

It seems basic common sense to comply with instructions issued by an HSE inspector, however I am frequently amazed by the failure of some businesses to act on the written or verbal instructions received.  It is simply not geed business sense and it is not surprising that the company has gone out of business……

Under the intensive inspection initiative, some 58 farms were visited over a period of two weeks. The statistics were released on the opening day of the Royal Highland Show.

Following the inspection, a total of 36 improvement notices were issued – which included 25 notices for using ATVs without appropriate training, 10 for a lack of suitable head protection, and one for poor maintenance.

Figures show that every year at least two people die and more than 1,000 suffer injuries in ATV accidents, on average.

In the four years up to 2008-09, some three agricultural workers lost their lives in incidents involving ATVs in Scotland.

Commenting on the results of the study, Michael Moore MP, Secretary of State for Scotland, said: “These results should act as a sharp shock for the agricultural industry. Agriculture remains one of the most dangerous ways to make a living in Britain and farmers must do more to protect themselves and their workers.

“Many incidents involving ATVs, like so many other farming-related incidents that can result in death or injury, are easily preventable if simple measures are taken.”

On Sunday afternoon a 15-year-old girl was recovered from the lake at Cotswold Water Park.

The girl, from Middlesex, died the following day after being treated in intensive care at Great Western Hospital in Swindon.

After her death at the park and beach, managed by Watermark, witnesses claimed there was a lack of staff at the site.

However, the company defended the claims saying that two managers, four lifeguards and two off-duty lifeguards were at the park

But a letter sent from Somerford Keynes Parish Council to Cotswold District Council’s health and safety officer days earlier raised concerns over “insufficient first aid officers and lifeguards”.

A spokesman for Cotswold Council confirmed a letter dated June 30 was received by the council’s health and safety officer on July 1.

The district council forwarded this letter to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), on July 8 wrongly assuming it was the appropriate regulator.

The HSE was responsible for regulating safety at the park while it was operated by a charity but when that changed in January 2008 the district council took over.

The parish council raised concerns over safety at the water park during a meeting on June. 7

Seems like a classic case of passing the buck rather than someone taking ownership of the problem, visiting the park, checking staff / training and sorting it out!

Work to develop the scheme, called for by IOSH for a number of years, has been accelerated as a result of Lord Young’s government review into health and safety. Lord Young has been critical of people operating as unqualified consultants, and blames them for some of the worst examples of over-the-top actions carried out in the name of health and safety.

The scheme, which will be voluntary, is likely to be introduced early next year, but announced soon. It will be set up and initially chaired by the Health and Safety Executive, and has been developed by a group of professional bodies led by IOSH and the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health. A consortium of professional bodies will eventually run the register.

IOSH members working as consultants will have to be Chartered to join the scheme, so that clients can be confident that they will get advice from someone with a degree level qualification in safety, practical experience, and a formal commitment to Continuing Professional Development.

Health and Safety Advisors at Britrisk Safety are appropriately qualified, giving you peace of mind when you use our outsourced service for your business.

“Screen fatigue” is regularly suffered by 90% of office workers, and the symptoms include headaches, sore or tired eyes, impaired colour perception and blurred vision. During their working life, the average office worker will spend 128,740 hours staring at a screen.

The Health and Safety (Display Screen Equipment) regulations place a legal obligation on all employers to make sure they care for the eye health of staff who regularly use a VDU (computer screen) at work in order to combat the visual stress associated with prolonged screen use.

There is no eye care policy at all amongst one in 10 businesses, while regular sight tests, which forms the most basic element of the legislation, are not provided by 44% of employers, the ScreenSmart study found.

Small businesses employing fewer than 10 people are the worst offenders. Absolutely no provision for eye care is provided by one in five (21%) small businesses, and the offer to pay for sight tests is only offered by a third, while three-quarters fail to ensure workstations are designed to minimise glare or reflections – two factors that can lead to screen fatigue and cause visual trauma.

When it came to big businesses, one in five (18%) did not meet the costs of regular sight tests, while two-fifths (40%) point blank refused to pay a contribution towards the cost of spectacles required solely for VDU work.

Our view:  Businesses of all sizes should ensure they cover the basics and carry out display screen / workstation risk assessments and act on their findings. This is a simple and inexpensive process to set up and one of our health and safety advisors would be able to help.  Call us for some complementary advice.