Health and safety: the state of play

STATE-OF-PLAY TABLE

SUBJECT

PROGRESS AND COMMENTS

Absence

see also Health, Health services, HSC/E

Incapacity

The Welfare Reform Bill completed its House of Lords stage on 27 March 2007, having passed through the Commons on 9 January. The Bill is now back in the Commons awaiting a date for consideration of the Lords' amendments. The Bill provides powers to replace incapacity benefit (IB) with a new employment support allowance. The government hopes that the allowance and a new personal capability assessment will help individuals return to, and remain in, work (HSB 352 p.8 and 346 p.6). Latest version of the Bill: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/pabills/200607/welfare_reform.htm. The government first published the Bill on 4 July 2006 (www.dwp.gov.uk/aboutus/welfarereform). This followed consultation on its proposals, which ended on 24 April 2006. The proposals are intended to return one million IB recipients back to work over 10 years (HSB 346 p.6). The green paper followed the Department for Work and Pensions' 2005 five-year plan (HSB 336 p.3). A new deal for welfare: empowering people to work, www.dwp.gov.uk/aboutus/welfarereform.

Agriculture

Gangmasters

From 1 December 2006, employers have committed an offence if they use an unlicensed gangmaster in agriculture and food processing (HSB 348 p.2). Two months earlier, it became an offence for gangmasters to operate without a licence. Gangmasters have been able to apply for a licence since 6 April 2006 (www.gla.gov.uk or tel: 0845 602 5020). Gangmasters Licensing (Exclusions) Regulations 2006³and Gangmasters (Appeals) Regulations 2006³.

Avian flu

On 5 February, in the wake of an outbreak of avian influenza among poultry at a Bernard Matthews plant in Suffolk, the HSE issued revised guidance for inspectors: Avian influenza - guidance for operational inspectors and HSAOs who may visit poultry undertakings, Sector information minute 01/2005/09, version 3:05/02/2007, www.hsenews.com
/2007/02/05/avian-influenza-inspectors-guidance (HSB 356 p.4).

Published

Occupational guidance on BSE, www.hsenews.com/2007/01/05/occupational-guidance-on-bse/ (HSB 356 p.4).

Asbestos

see also Chemicals

Directive

The Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 were laid before parliament on 20 October 2006 and came into force on 13 November (SI 2006/2739³ or www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si200627.htm) (HSB 354 p.9). They implement the second amendment to the 1983 asbestos Directive (HSB 344 p.4) and merge the three existing sets of asbestos Regulations, reduce exposure limits, introduce detailed mandatory training for work with asbestos and simplify the regulatory regime. Approved Codes of Practice: Work with materials containing asbestos, ISBN 0 7176 6206 3, £13.50¹ and The management of asbestos in non-domestic premises, ISBN 0 7176 6209 8, £9.50¹. Online advice: www.hse.gov.uk/asbestos/regulations.htm?ebul=hsegen/20-nov-06&cr=6. The HSC approved the draft Regulations on 27 July 2006 (HSB 352 p.24). Although most of the Regulations are uncontentious, the HSC proceeded with its controversial proposals to remove work with asbestos-containing textured decorative coatings from the licensing regime. The Regulations repealed are: the Control of Asbestos at Work Regulations 2002, the Asbestos (Licensing) Regulations 1983 and the Asbestos (Prohibitions) Regulations 1992, as amended. Consultation closed on 31 January 2006 on the HSC's proposals; the HSE received 504 responses, "with considerable support for the majority of the proposals to tighten protection for those working with asbestos". Two proposals received "a more mixed reaction", according to the HSE: the implementation of the amending Directive's provisions on "sporadic and low-intensity exposure" and the removal of coatings from licensing requirements. The HSC published its proposals on 3 November 2005. Proposals for revised asbestos Regulations and an Approved Code of Practice, CD 205¹ or www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd205.htm. The European Council of Ministers adopted the Directive on 18 February 2003. The UK supported the Directive. Directive 2003/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 83/477/EEC on the protection of workers from risks related to exposure to asbestos at work, OJ L97/15.4.03⁹.

Pleural plaques

The House of Lords will hear an important appeal concerning compensation for pleural plaques from 25 June to 2 July 2007 (HSB 354 p.4). On 26 January 2006, the Court of Appeal held that workers will no longer be able to claim damages for symptomless pleural plaques (HSB 347 p.18 and 346 p.5): Rothwell v Chemical & Insulating Co Ltd and others [2005] EWHC 2941 (QB), [2005] All ER (D) 248 (Dec). As it stands, the judgment will prevent 100,000 claimants from pursuing claims, saving insurers between £1 billion and £1.4 billion.

Chrysotile

Health campaigners criticised the decision of international communities not to add chrysotile asbestos to a global trade "watch list" (the Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent) (HSB 354 p.6).

Published

Asbestos workers database: Summary statistics, HSL/2007/05, www.hsenews.com/2007/02/06/abestos-workers-database-summary-statistics/ (HSB 356 p.4).

Atypical work

Services Directive

On 12 December 2006, EU ministers adopted a Directive on services in the internal market. Adoption followed a second reading in the European Parliament (EP) on 15 November 2006 (a common position was agreed by ministers on 24 July 2006. Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market, OJ L 376, 27.12.2006⁹ or eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006L0123:EN:NOT. Member states have three years in which to implement the Directive. The HSE is broadly happy with the text, which aims to secure a genuine internal market in services in the EU by removing legal and administrative barriers to the development of service activities (HSB 351 p.4). The Directive's original text made the service provider subject only to the laws of its own country, which could have lower standards than those in force in the EU ("the country of origin principle"). The HSE argued that this approach risked "seriously undermining sensible UK controls on work-related health and safety risks" (www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldeucom/23/23we10.htm). The HSE subsequently secured a derogation for health and safety from the "country of origin principle" in the "work in progress text" of 14 November 2005 (HSC paper HSC/06/01⁷). The derogation met "the HSE's aims" and covered all health and safety legislation, except for working time and welfare (which are covered by other derogations). At the proposal's first reading on 16 February 2006, however, the EP threw out the country of origin principle, replacing it with a "freedom to provide services", albeit fewer services than originally intended and with an expansion in the powers of member states to restrict this freedom (HSB 347 p.2). The commission produced a compromise text on 4 April 2006 that incorporated most of the EP's amendments (HSB 348 p.11). Under this, the new "freedom to provide services" provision allows member states to impose national requirements that are justified for reasons of public policy, public security (including public safety), public health or the protection of the environment. Taken with the rest of the Directive, the HSE is confident that this will enable it to maintain the UK's statutory provisions and to enforce health and safety legislation against temporary service providers (HSC paper MISC/06/14⁷).

Business involvement

see also Corporate social responsibility, Directors, Enforcement

Strategic programme

Although the HSE's "Business involvement strategic enabling programme" was due to end in April 2008, a "Fundamental Review" of the HSE's work has led it to wind up the formal programme a year early and reprioritise the individual "workstreams" that make up the programme. These workstreams, which represent some of the HSE's most significant initiatives, are covered throughout the state-of-play table. The highest priorities, which will be "actively pursued", are: the large organisations pilot project (see below); directors' duties; "intelligence hub" (liaison with Fit 3, transformational government issues, research tools); and "think small first" (information, advice and guidance). The medium priorities, which will also be actively pursued, are: the Corporate Health and Safety Performance Index (CHaSPI) and the SME Indicator; and reactive work underpinning the legal framework (Employers Liability Compulsory Insurance, Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999). The lower priorities, which will be "delayed until resources permit further activity", include: case studies on business benefits and directors' duties; the costs of accidents ready reckoner (negotiations with Businesslink are ongoing about its taking over the running of the tool); public reporting; supply-chain engagement; the Good Neighbour scheme; and reward and recognition. HSC paper HSC/07/03⁷.

LOPP

The HSE's Large Organisation Partnership Pilot (LOPP) started in October 2005 and is looking at the most effective ways for enforcing authorities to work with large organisations. It involves 14 organisations from the HSE- and local authority-enforced sectors, employing more than one million workers. The HSE's one-year evaluation reported the successful establishment of working relationships with 14 of the 17 organisations originally invited to participate. The HSE expects the results of a full evaluation by mid-2008, which it hopes to publish by the end of that year (HSB 357 p.6). Although trade unions are cautious of, but participating in, LOPP, some fear that the project may be a precursor to self-regulation and inspection "holidays" (HSB 349 p.5). LOPP details: Laurence Golob, tel: 020 7717 6484, email: laurence.golob@hse.gsi.gov.uk.

Chemicals/Dangerous subs

see also Asbestos, Major hazards

REACH

The Regulation introducing the EU's new chemicals regime will come into force on 1 June 2007, following its adoption by EU ministers on 18 December 2006 (HSB 355 p.7): Regulation (EC) No.1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals, OJ L 396/30.12.2006⁹ or http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:396:som:en:html.The 849-page REACH Regulation requires producers to register all chemicals produced or imported in volumes of more than one tonne a year. Registration will be phased over 11 years from 2008, beginning with the most toxic substances and those produced in the largest quantities. REACH will affect around 30,000 substances and replace some 40 pieces of legislation. A new European Chemicals Agency, which will be based in Helsinki, will be responsible for the day-to-day management of the new requirements. An HSE paper, "noted" on 17 January 2006 by the HSC's monthly meeting, reveals disquiet within the HSE about chemicals legislation in the UK post-REACH. Although the Regulation will not require the revocation of COSHH, REACH will be the superior instrument and the HSE believes that employers' duties to conduct risk assessments under COSHH will eventually be overtaken (HSC paper HSC/06/13⁷). The European Parliament endorsed the Regulation on 13 December 2006, following a compromise on substitution under which all authorisations will require submission of a substitution plan if alternatives exist, or a research and development plan if they do not (HSB 354 p.3).

In March 2007, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) - the lead government department - published a Consultation on the enforcement of REACH in the UK, www.defra.gov.uk. Consultation will close on 4 June 2007 (responses: necs@defra.gsi.gov.uk). On 10 October 2006, Defra appointed the HSE as the UK's competent authority for the REACH regime.

Classification

Consultation closed on 21 October 2006 on the European Commission's proposed Regulation on the classification and labelling of chemicals (HSB 352 p.9). The Regulation would bring the EU system in line with the United Nations Globally Harmonised System (GHS), which aims to have the same criteria worldwide for classifying chemicals according to their health, environmental and physical hazards, as well as common hazard communication requirements for labelling and safety data sheets. The UK's response to the commission welcomes the implementation of the GHS through a Regulation, albeit subject to resolution of its reservations. These include the length of the transition period, the legal basis and scope (consultations.hse.gov.uk/inovem/consult.ti/ghschemicals/listdocuments). The commission was expected to publish its revised proposal in the Official Journal of the EU in spring 2007, with European Parliament and Council of Ministers discussions starting in April 2007. The HSE is currently working on a regulatory impact assessment for the proposal.

IOELV Directives

The HSE will publish new and revised Workplace Exposure Limits (WELs) for 21 substances in May 2007. The changes will come into force on 1 October 2007, implementing (one month later than required) the second Directive on indicative occupational exposure limit values (IOELVs), which was adopted on 7 February 2006 (no.2006/15/EC, OJ L38/9.2.06⁹). The IOELV Directives establish lists of substances with agreed exposure limit values that member states must take into account when setting domestic limits. They form part of the ongoing implementation of the chemical agents Directive (98/24/EC). The second Directive covered 33 substances: the HSE is introducing six WELs for additional substances, withdrawing one and amending 14 existing ones (HSC paper HSC/07/13⁷). Consultation closed on the HSC's consultation on 27 September 2006. The HSE received 22 responses: two were "no comments" and all the others agreed with the HSE. Proposals to implement the second list of IOELVs, CD 208¹. The first IOELV Directive (2000/39/EC) was implemented in the UK in December 2001 (HSB 309 p.14) through EH40/2002 (now EH40/2006).

Biocidal products

The Biocidal Products (Amendment) Regulations 2006 were laid before parliament on 9 February 2007 and came into force on 6 April (SI 2007 No.293³). Consultation closed on 9 June 2006 on the HSC's proposals to rectify shortcomings identified by the European Commission in the UK's implementation of the 1998 biocidal products Directive (98/8/EC), and take account of EC Regulations governing the review of active substances that are already on the European market (HSB 348 p.5). The Regulations amend those of 2001 to introduce procedures to allow applications to be made for use of an active substance in a biocidal product and for the authorisation for marketing and use of such biocidal products. The changes do not alter the way in which the current regime operates. The Regulations came into force six months later than planned; the delays focused on draft reg. 33, which concerns advertising, existing products and derogations. The HSE received enquiries about the scope of these requirements, and confirmed that these provisions do not extend to product labelling or packaging, which are dealt with separately under regs. 30 and 31. An update on the HSC's consultation on proposals for the Biocidal Products (Amendment) Regulations 2006, www.hse.gov.uk/biocides/consultupdate.htm (HSB 356 p.4). Consultation ran between 16 March 2006 and 9 June 2006, eliciting 28 responses. Proposals for revised Biocidal Products (Amendment) Regulations 2006, CD206¹. An electronic copy of the responses is available from the HSE's Knowledge Centre, tel: 0151 951 4382.

Hairdressers

The HSE started a Bad Hand Day campaign in late 2006 to help Britain's 130,000 hairdressers avoid dermatitis (HSB 355 p.9). The campaign saw the distribution of 20,000 campaign packs. The next stage, which is currently being planned, will involve 42,000 visits by local authority inspectors in 2007/08 to the catering industry to reduce wet work and encourage proper hand washing and drying (HSC paper HSC/07/25⁷). Details: www.badhandday.hse.gov.uk and www.hse.gov.uk/skin/index.htm.

Published

Use of chemical protective gloves to control dermal exposures in the uv lithographic printing sub-sector, RR 525¹ or www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr525.htm (HSB 357 p.5); Legionnaire's disease at chemical sites, www.hsenews.com/2006/12/21/legionnaires-disease-at-chemical-sites/; Hairdressing: harm via skin or eye contact, SR11; Electrolysis, piercing, tattooing and micro-pigmentation: general ventilation, SR12; and Nail bars: engineering control, SR13, COSHH essentials series, www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/guidance/srseries.htm?ebul=hsegen/20-nov-06&cr=13.

Compensation

IIDB

Consultation will close on 22 April 2007 on the government's consultation on possible reform of the Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit scheme (IIDB) and related benefits (HSB 357 p.3). The government will publish its analysis of the responses and proposed reforms by 22 July 2007. IIDB scheme - a consultation paper, www.dwp.gov.uk/consultations/2007/. Responses: Steve Daly, adelphi.iidbreview@dwp.gsi.gov.uk.

Computer applications

Expert systems

HSE-commissioned research concluded that there is limited information, and no robust evaluation evidence, on the use by international regulators of expert systems (HSB 355 p.8). The report covers workplace transport, slips and trips, and noise and vibration. Evaluation into the success of occupational health and safety regulators and organisations' use of expert systems, HSE RR 508, www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr508.htm.

Construction

see also Work at height

Legislation

The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 (CDM) were laid before parliament on 15 February 2007 and came into force on 6 April (SI 2007 No.320³). A "prayer" against the Regulations laid by David Cameron, the leader of the Conservative Party, will not be heard until after parliament's Easter recess. The Regulations revise and merge the CDM Regulations 1994 and the Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 (HSB 338 p.21). The new Regulations will: increase the emphasis on effective planning and management of construction projects; improve risk management by ensuring responsibility is devolved upon those best placed to influence or manage it; reduce bureaucracy; and simplify and clarify the law for dutyholders, so they can easily understand what they (and other members of the construction project team) are required to do. Approved Code of Practice (ACoP): Managing health and safety in construction, ISBN 9 78071 766223 4, £15¹. The guidance package is almost complete (www.cskills.org/cdm): guidance is available for designers, principal contractors, contractors and workers; guidance for clients and CDM coordinators will be added shortly. The guidance is "live", so as to enable additions and updates. The guidance was developed by an industry-led steering group established by the HSC's construction industry advisory committee (CONIAC). The HSC agreed the draft Regulations and ACoP on 20 October 2006 (HSB 354 p.9). Although approval was "unanimous", some employer representatives expressed considerable disquiet about the effect of the measures on small firms, arguing that the Regulations introduce new duties for the client by abolishing the position of client's "agent". The HSE rejects this notion, insisting that the Regulations do not introduce new duties. Further information: HSC paper HSC/06/54⁷. Consultation on the draft Regulations closed on 30 September 2005 and elicited 420 replies (HSC paper HSC/06/76⁷).

Competence

The Electrical Contractors' Association (ECA) and the Heating and Ventilating Contractors' Association (HVCA) published "core criteria" that they hope will help enhance the safety aspects of the tendering process for construction projects (HSB 354 p.6). The criteria will be included in the guidance on the forthcoming CDM Regulations 2007 (see above). Core criteria for assessing contractor safety, www.hse.gov.uk/electricity/live.htm.

Participation

With the HSE's construction worker engagement initiative now in its third year (HSB 356 p.16), HSE-commissioned research concluded that informal face-to-face communication, rather than written methods, is the best way of engaging construction workers (HSB 354 p.17). An investigation of approaches to worker engagement, HSE RR 516, www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr516.htm.

Injuries

Construction injury rates in 2005/06 were on course to achieve the Revitalising and Public Service Agreement targets, but still short of the targets that the industry set itself at the 2001 Construction Summit (HSB 354 p.9). Between 1999/2000 and 2005/06, the employee major injury rate fell by 22% and the over-three-day rate by 31%. The fatal injury rate for workers fell by 36%. Data: www.hse.gov.uk/statistics.

Warnings/Alerts

The HSE issued a safety alert on 19 October 2006 concerning tower cranes². The alert follows several serious incidents involving tower cranes, most recently at Battersea in October 2006 (HSB 354 p.9). On 19 January 2007, the HSE announced that it had served a prohibition notice on Falcon Crane Hire Ltd of Shipdam, Norfolk, requiring it to take out of service all tower cranes in its fleet that had not been examined by an independent competent person (HSB 356 p.3)². The notice follows two fatal crane collapses in four months, including at Battersea. Following the second collapse, the HSE reissued a safety alert on 16 January: HSE safety alert on the use of tower cranes (PDF format, 65.3K). After the death of a construction worker, the HSE issued advice on 9 October 2006 concerning the routine examination and inspection of components of lifting tackle that are not visible unless dismantled (HSB 354 p.9). Investigation report: Report on fatal injury to Sam Ball on 16 January 2002 (PDF format, 34.3K).

Olympic Games

CLM, which will help manage the delivery of the venues and infrastructure for London's 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games, formally committed in November 2006 to the games' health and safety standard. The Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) published the standard in July 2006; among its requirements are that delivery partners should "aim to achieve no more than one reportable accident for every million man hours worked". Design and construction health and safety standard, www.london2012.com/en/ourvision/ODA/Healthandsafety.htm (HSB 355 p.10).

Corporate social responsibility

see also Directors

Reporting

The HSE's "reprioritisation" of its business involvement work has shifted public reporting by employers on their health and safety performance to its lowest work priority, which means that "work will be delayed until resources permit further activity" (see Business involvement above).

Just 26% of 217 companies with more than 250 employees published information on health and safety in 2005/06. The HSE-commissioned research also revealed that only 13 of the companies managed a score of five or more out of 11 in relation to the quality of the information (see next HSB). The research follows a similar study of the "top 350" UK companies and 918 public bodies published in 2005, and earlier reports on data from 2000 and 2002 (HSB 343 p.9). Study of the public reporting of occupational health and safety performance in 2005 by UK businesses with over 250 employees, Systems Concepts, RR 515¹.

Directors

see also Corporate social responsibility

Guidance

The HSE hopes to publish revised guidance for directors in autumn 2007. The Institute of Directors (IoD) is leading a stakeholder group developing the guidance, with the HSE providing the secretariat. The guidance, which is likely to be in two versions (for SMEs and larger organisations), will link from the HSE's website to important documents and legislation. It is also likely that the guidance will be "badged" by the IoD and HSC, but the details are currently being finalised (HSB 357 p.7). The HSC decided on 9 May 2006 that it would not pursue the development of statutory duties for directors - for the time being - although it would return to the issue at a subsequent meeting (HSB 351 p.1). The decision followed discussion of HSC paper HSC/06/044⁷. On 22 June 2006, the HSC's chair, Bill Callaghan, wrote to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) stating that the commission would look again at the issue "once wider developments, notably on corporate manslaughter, penalties and directors' duties under company law are clearer and the implications for director responsibility for health and safety better understood" (letter: www.hse.gov.uk/foi/releases/chairsletter.htm). At its December 2005 meeting, the HSC asked the HSE to explore legislative options for introducing directors' duties (HSB 345 p.1). The HSE subsequently consulted 22 individuals representing 14 organisations; although it found a consensus that credible and clear guidance on director leadership is essential and that current legislation must be enforced adequately, there was "fundamental disagreement" as to a need for specific duties. The HSC agreed, and asked the HSE instead to revise its 2001 guidance for directors. The new guidance will focus on directors, not managers, and set out what is expected of directors and collective action at board level within the broader context in which directors operate. Callaghan also informed the DWP that the HSE is producing revised guidance for inspectors "that clearly sets out when it is possible to prosecute a director, and which also reinforces existing guidance that, if a body corporate commits an offence, then personal failures by directors should be considered as part of the investigation".

HSE-commissioned research published on 27 October 2006 described "what best practice in occupational health and safety governance looks like" (HSB 354 p.9). The report suggests that the HSE's guidance on directors' responsibilities (INDG343) be expanded to include some of the principles. Defining best practice in corporate occupational health and safety governance, RR506, www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr506.htm.

Published

Case studies that identify and exemplify boards of directors who provide leadership and direction on occupational health and safety, RR 499, www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr499.htm (HSB 354 p.9).

Disability

Risk management

On 26 March 2007, the HSC and the Disability Rights Commission (DRC) issued a joint statement on health and safety risk management and disability. The HSE notes that the DRC and HSC/E have "long been concerned about the use of health and safety requirements as a false excuse for not employing sick or disabled people" (HSC paper HSC/07/15⁷), and the statement argues that the two bodies of law, "when used appropriately will work together to increase the employability and retention of disabled people". The statement builds on the DRC's Code of practice for employment and the HSE's guidance, Managing sickness absence and return to work. It reflects the HSE's "sensible risk management principles" (see Risk below) and provides a basis for further work; the HSE and the DRC are currently developing guidance on risk assessment, which will be published later in 2007. Joint DRC/HSC statement on overarching principles of health and safety management and disability, www.hse.gov.uk/aboutus/diversity/jointstatement.htm.

Energy

see also Nuclear

Gas review

On 9 January 2007, after lengthy debate, the HSC approved a paper on the gas safety review that recommended: the HSC/E should retain oversight of the domestic gas safety regime, although this should be reviewed at an appropriate date; the gas installer registration scheme should be reformed to improve domestic gas safety and over time reduce direct demands on HSE staff; and there should be "an element" of competition for a five-year franchise to run the new scheme, with new governance requirements. The HSE's provisional timetable is to: publish the new registration scheme in May 2007; announce the new franchisee in September 2007 (which may be CORGI or another body); amend the legislation, if necessary, by late 2007; and have the new franchisee start work by April 2008 (HSC paper HSC/07/09⁷). The review builds on the HSC's fundamental review of gas safety in 2000 (HSB 320 p.19) and comprises: a review of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 and enforcement options, as part of the government's Better Regulation agenda (HSB 338 p.19); a review of the gas registration scheme; and research into the scale of carbon monoxide poisoning from domestic gas appliances. The HSE contracted out most of the work to Frontline Consultants. The work was informed by stakeholder conferences in February 2006 and October 2006. Information and progress: www.hse.gov.uk/gas/domestic/index.htm.

Enforcement

see also Agriculture, HSC/E, Legislation, Manslaughter, Regulation

Hampton

Progress is continuing apace on the implementation of Philip Hampton's report on the enforcement of business-related legislation, which was published on 16 March 2005 (Hampton and the regulators): Reducing administrative burdens: effective inspection and enforcement (final report), HM Treasury, ISBN 1 84532 088 3, www.hm-treasury.gov.uk. The government accepted all of the recommendations made by Hampton. Progress is covered in separate entries below. The HSC/E came out of the Hampton report well, with many of the recommendations reflecting the HSC's own strategy. The report called for higher fines, a reduction in unnecessary inspection and paperwork in favour of an increased role for advice, and the merging of many national regulators. A paper prepared by the HSE for the HSC noted that the HSC's "strategy and the engagement of HSE officials with the review process has had considerable influence over the review's thinking. Many of the recommendations align with current or developing policies, most notably on the penalties regime. We should interpret this as a vote of confidence in the way we deliver our objectives, and not be shy to say so." The HSE believes that the incorporation into the HSE of some small enforcement bodies should not be problematic, although the absorption of the Gangmasters' Licensing Authority "could prove more difficult given its size, remit and very new status". Other resulting work for the HSE includes "careful examination of the risk assessment concept and our management of inspection and enforcement; vigorous pursuit of our work on accessible channels of advice and studying other points in the report around advice provision; continuing our work on penalties and evaluation of the Enforcement policy statement; better regulation, forms, databases and regulatory impact assessments; and involvement with the proposed new bodies, the Better Regulation Executive and the National Regulatory Forum." HSC papers HSC/05/51⁷ and HSC/06/21⁷.

Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006

The first of two Bills implementing recommendations of the Hampton report (see above) received royal assent on 8 November 2006 and came into force on 8 January 2007. A second implementing Bill - the Deregulation Bill - was due to be published in October 2006, but has not yet appeared. The Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006 also implements recommendations made in a report from the Better Regulation Task Force: Regulation - less is more (HSB 339 p.4 and 341 p.2). The Act³ provides for the repeal of legislation that ministers consider a financial, administrative, inefficient, unproductive, unprofitable "burden" or a sanction that prevents the carrying on of a lawful activity. It also provides for a statutory Regulators' compliance code, on which the Better Regulation Executive (BRE) plans to start consultation on 14 May 2007. The code is scheduled to come into force on 1 April 2008 and may require the HSC to modify its Enforcement policy statement. The BRE published a draft code in March 2006: although the HSE supported the "broad intent", it criticised the code's "overly prescriptive language" and said that it should be framed as simply as possible, around the Act's regulatory principles of proportionality, transparency, accountability and consistency, which the HSE has "long followed" (HSC paper MISC/07/08⁷).

The Cabinet Office's consultation on the legislation - then known as the Better Regulation Bill - closed on 12 October 2005 (HSB 344 p.3). It elicited 77 responses; although most of the original proposals found their way into the final version of the Bill, the government claimed that consultation generated "less interest" in strengthening the penalty regime than in other proposals, although a majority was in favour. It therefore decided to drop its proposed penalty reform power from the Bill, leaving any measures until the Macrory review of penalties reported in late 2006 (see below) (HSB 346 p.3). The HSC welcomed most parts of the Bill (HSC paper HSC/05/120⁷). The government published the final version of the Bill on 11 January 2006, details of which were criticised by a select committee: Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill. Procedure select committee first report, HC 894, 2005-06. Bill: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm
200506/cmbills/111/06111csp.htm.

Regulators

Implementing a recommendation of the Hampton report to reduce the numbers of national inspectorates, the health and safety functions of the Engineering Inspectorate - four members of staff - transferred to the HSE in October 2006. The HSE is now the sole regulator for all safety issues associated with electricity transmission and distribution. The proposed transfer of inspection functions from the Coal Authority was dropped because it turned out that the function amounted to less than one staff year of activity. Instead, the government accepted that "the same result is best achieved by formalising coordination of inspections between the HSE and the Coal Authority." In October 2006, the HSC approved a consultation document on the merger of the Gangmasters' Licensing Authority (GLA). The document is now with ministers (HSC paper MISC/07/08⁷).

Penalties

The government announced in November 2006 that it accepted all the recommendations contained in the Macrory report on sanctions imposed on employers that break the law (HSB 355 p.17). The HSE appears happy with the recommendations, pointing out that their use is discretionary. The report, which was published in November 2006, recommends: improvements in the effectiveness of criminal courts for cases of regulatory non-compliance; alternative sanctioning options for cases of regulatory non-compliance heard in the criminal courts, including profits orders, corporate rehabilitation orders, community projects, mandatory compliance audits and publicity orders; allowing regulators to impose Fixed and Variable Monetary Administrative Penalties; a strengthened system of statutory notices; the introduction of Enforceable Undertakings; and pilot Restorative Justice projects. Regulatory justice: making sanctions effective. Final report, Professor Richard Macrory, November 2006, www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/regulation/reviewing_regulation/penalties/index.asp. Consultation on the review closed on 18 August 2006 (HSB 351 p.9): Regulatory justice: sanctioning in a post-Hampton world, May 2006, Macrory review, Better Regulation Executive, www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/regulation/penalties.

The HSE carried out its own online consultation on alternative penalties for health and safety offences at the end of 2005 (www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/penalties.htm) (HSB 345 p.16). The consultation formed part of the HSE's review of the HSC's Enforcement policy statement (see below). The HSE received responses from 15 organisations and 16 individuals. It advised that most respondents agreed that alternative penalties could have a place in health and safety and should be explored further. There was broad support for the options of administrative fines and adverse publicity orders, but little agreement on any other alternatives. The HSE used its online consultation to inform its response to the Macrory review. This argued that the outcome of the Macrory review will not impose significant changes on the HSE.

Overall, the HSE believes that the Macrory review "poses no threat to the HSC's existing enforcement strategy", and that the HSC/E can "welcome" the set of penalties and framework for their application. Further, Macrory's proposals "would not impose changes in the way we work. As part of Macrory's vision, the use of criminal prosecutions would remain appropriate for serious breaches where there was evidence of intentional or reckless flouting of the law, whether by an individual or a business. How current regulatory tools are used and applied would not be affected. The principles of using any new alternative penalties will be set out in the proposed Compliance code, details of which are still being worked on." Further, the HSE envisages that "there will be no compulsion on the [HSE] to adopt any new alternative penalty proposed. The intention is to allow the regulator to choose, if any, the best-fit alternative penalty tool(s) for [its] regime. Any alternative penalty would need to be in addition, and not an alternative, to existing powers" (HSC paper HSC/06/30⁷).

Policy statement

An HSE-commissioned review of the HSC's Enforcement policy statement concluded that it was fit for purpose and enjoyed stakeholder support. The statement sets out the principles and approach that the HSC expects of the HSE and local authorities when enforcing health and safety legislation. It was last revised in 2002. Although the review concluded that there is currently no need to revise the statement, the HSE may need to consider revision later in 2007 once it has discussed with the Better Regulation Executive the outcomes of the Macrory review and developments on the compliance code, which is provided for by the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006 (see above). The HSC "noted" the report's findings at its meeting on 9 January 2007 and asked the HSE to produce a paper on the developments for discussion at a summer 2007 meeting. Evaluation of EPS and enforcement action: main report, Greenstreet Berman, RR 519/2006. HSC paper: HSC/06/78⁷.

Enforcement record

The numbers of HSE-instigated enforcement notices, prosecutions and convictions plummeted to all-time lows in 2005/06 (HSB 354 p.2): Health and safety statistics 2005/06, HSC and National Statistics, www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/enforce/index.htm. The HSE claims that it reversed the trend in 2006/07, although published confirmation is not available.

Exceptional fines

The period covered by the table saw 22 fines of £100,000 and above (an unusually high number): Network Rail, £4 million; Corus UK Ltd, £1.33 million (HSB 355 p.1); British Nuclear Group Sellafield Ltd, £500,000 (HSB 354 p.2); Nexen Petroleum UK Ltd, £400,000 (HSB 357 p.1); Rosekey Ltd and Kashmir Atwal, £180,000 (HSB 355 p.2); Balfour Beatty Rail Infrastructure Services Ltd, £180,000 (HSB 357 p.2); Southern Cross Healthcare Group plc, £175,000 (HSB 357 p.4); Earl's Court Ltd, £175,000 (HSB 356 p.2); Travis Perkins Ltd, £175,000 (HSB 355 p.2); Kubota (UK) Ltd, £175,000 (HSB 355 p.8); Saint Gobain Pipelines plc, £150,000 (HSB 356 p.2); Nightfreight (GB) Ltd, £150,000 (HSB 354 p.6); Network Rail Infrastructure, £130,000 (HSB 355 p.6); Tulip Ltd, £130,000 (HSB 355 p.2); Société Reverchon Industries, £120,000 (HSB 355 p.8); Deborah Services Ltd, £110,000 (HSB 354 p.6); Cementation Foundations (Skanska) Ltd, £100,000 (HSB 354 p.6); Photo-Me International plc, £100,000 (HSB 354 p.8); Ruttle Contracting Ltd, £100,000 (HSB 355 p.3); Pin Croft Dyeing and Printing Co Ltd, £100,000 (HSB 355 p.3); Re-Bau GmbH, £100,000; Auchinlea Tyres, £100,000.

Scotland

On 19 October 2006, the HSE signed a joint working protocol on work-related deaths in Scotland with the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland and the British Transport Police (HSB 354 p.9). The protocol sets out how the organisations will work together to investigate deaths, in much the same way as the protocol covering England and Wales (HSB 318 p.1): www.hse.gov.uk.

Inspectors

In an important ruling, an employment tribunal in Dundee held that inspectors need only be "of the opinion" that there is a breach of statutory duty in order to be justified in issuing an improvement notice. Further, an inspector's discretion in selecting a particular type of enforcement action may not even be subject to a test of what is "reasonable". Dundee City Council v David Stephen, case no.S/104918/06, 7, 8 and 14 September 2007. Published reasons: 30 December 2006 (HSB 357 p.21).

Explosives

Published

Guidance on refusal/revocation of mser registrations/licences and the appeal process
(PDF format, 74.2K) (HSB 355 p.9).

EU

see also Atypical work, Chemicals, Legislation

Strategy

The European Commission published its health and safety strategy for 2007-2012 on 21 February 2007, and formally presented the strategy to the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs (EPSCO) Council meeting on 22 February 2007. The council will consider the strategy at its meeting on 30 and 31 May 2007. The eight main objectives are to: guarantee the proper implementation of EU legislation; support SMEs in the implementation of the legislation in force; adapt the legal framework to changes in the workplace and simplify it, particularly in respect of SMEs; promote the development and implementation of national strategies; encourage changes in the behaviour of workers, and encourage their employers to adopt health-focused approaches; finalise the methods for identifying and evaluating new potential risks; improve the tracking of progress; and promote health and safety at international level. The HSE's initial reaction to the strategy is that "there is much in it that the UK can support", although it questions the strategy's target to cut accidents at work in the EU by 25%: "This poses particular issues for member states like the UK that have already achieved good standards of health and safety" (HSC paper: Misc 07/07⁷). Strategy: Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Improving quality and productivity at work - Community strategy 2007-2012 on health and safety at work, COM(2007) 62. The commission's advisory committee for safety and health at work adopted an Opinion on the strategy on 23 November 2006 (HSB 355 p.4). Details: www.hse.gov.uk/aboutus/europe/euronews/december2006/oshstrategy.htm.

Published

Fourth European working conditions survey, www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/htmlfiles/ef0698.htm (HSB 357 p.4).

Fire

Building Regulations

Regulations came into force on 6 April 2007 to change Part B (Fire Safety) of the Building Regulations and supporting guidance in Approved Document B. The changes will affect future building work in England and Wales; premises affected by the changes include residential care homes and warehouses (HSB 355 p.4). The changes reflect developments in construction techniques and experiences of recent fires. The Building and Approved Inspectors (Amendment) (No.2) Regulations 2006, SI 2006 No.3318, guidance and background details: www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1130474.

First aid

Providers

The HSE updated its advice on 6 February 2007 for training providers who wish to run first-aid-at-work courses (HSB 356 p.4). The advice also covers the approval process: www.hse.gov.uk/firstaid/training.htm.

Health

see also Absence, SMEs, Smoking

Securing health

Details are given throughout this table on individual health issues and on progress on components of the HSE and government's 10-year occupational health strategy, Securing health together, which was launched in July 2000 (HSB 291 p.13). The HSC restated its commitment to meeting Securing's ill-health targets in its 2004 strategy, and the HSE believes this gives a clearer focus to the priorities and their delivery. The HSE has redesigned and updated the strategy's website (www.hse.gov.uk/sh2/index.htm), which provides news, case studies, background information, linked events and statistics.

On 19 October 2005, the Department of Health and the HSE launched the first stage of a strategy, Health, work and wellbeing - caring for our future, which aims to pull together different government initiatives around these issues, including absence and disability (HSB 344 p.6) Health, work and well-being - Caring for our future (PDF format, 236K).

Prevention

A employment tribunal in Dundee ruled that preventive, rather than reactive, occupational health management is implicit in the arrangements required by the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 (although this does not mean that all organisations, regardless of size, must have access to an external occupational health service). Dundee City Council v David Stephen, case no.S/104918/06 (see Enforcement (Inspectors) above and HSB 357 p.21).

Dermatitis

The HSE and British Safety Industry Federation issued a joint leaflet on 31 October 2006 on skin care in at-risk organisations (HSB 354 p.9): It's in your hands, www.hse.gov.uk/skin/information.htm.

Respiratory disorders

In late 2006, the HSE published online advice on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), claiming there would be 3,000 fewer COPD cases if occupational risks - dusts, smoke and fume - were removed. HSE advice: www.hse.gov.uk/copd/index.htm (HSB 355 p.10).

Health services

see also Violence

Absence

HSE-commissioned research suggested ways that occupational health services in the NHS could collect more effective "real time" data on employee sickness absence: A pilot study into improving sickness absence recording in NHS acute trusts, RR 531¹ or www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr531.htm (HSB 357 p.5).

Website

The HSE updated its health services and social care website to incorporate new information on musculoskeletal disorders, its programme of work for 2006/07 and formal working arrangements with other regulators and agencies: www.hse.gov.uk/healthservices/index.htm.

HSC/E

see also Enforcement

Revitalising

Details on progress on the government and HSC's Revitalising health and safety strategy are given throughout this table under individual subject headings. Revitalising set targets for reductions in injury, ill-health and absence incidence by 2010. Figures for 2005/06 - the sixth year - showed falls from 2004/05 in the numbers and rates of fatal, major and over-three-day injuries reported by employers under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995. The figures, taken with self-reported data under the Labour Force Survey, led the HSE to "upgrade" the progress that stakeholders are making towards the three Revitalising targets to, respectively: on target; probably on target; and no clear trend (HSB 354 p.11). Health and safety statistics 2005/06 (PDF format, 516K) or HSE Statistics Branch, tel: 0151 951 4697. Detailed data: www.hse.gov.uk/statistics.

Achievement of the targets is linked to 44 Revitalising action points. Most of the more controversial legislative changes have either been delayed or dropped (HSB 347 p.7), and most of the non-legislative action points are now in place. Much of the information on "progress" on the HSE's Revitalising website is out of date (www.hse.gov.uk/revitalising/index.htm). The site also provides links to each of the nine sectors and issues that the HSC identified as priorities for securing the targets: agriculture, construction, health services, falls from height, musculoskeletal disorders, slips and trips, work-related stress, workplace transport, and the government as exemplar.

PSA targets

Performance against targets during the third quarter of the Public Service Agreement (PSA) is "largely to plan", according to an HSE report (HSC paper HSC/07/26⁷). The PSA comprises six targets for 2007/08: three on occupational health and safety outcomes that are essentially along the lines of the Revitalising targets above; and three on precursor incidents in major hazard industries. Although the HSE reports "notable successes", it cautions that there are "areas of concern", particularly its ability to reach the fatal and major injuries target. The major hazards strategic programme "remains broadly on track" to deliver its targets, although the offshore sector "continues to move away from the target". The report adds: "There is some concern that emerging external pressures and the continuing need to divert resources will reduce the programme's ability to maintain and improve control of major hazard risk in the longer term." Overall, PSA progress remains "amber/green", ie "mixed - aspect(s) require substantial attention, some good." The HSC agreed on 6 February 2007 to send the HSE's report to the minister for health and safety.

Fit 3

The Fit3 strategic delivery programme ("Fit for work, fit for life, fit for tomorrow") began in April 2005. It is an all-embracing initiative that is central to the HSE's attempts to meet injury, ill-health and absence targets by 2007/08 (HSB 350 p.9 and 346 p.22). The HSE reports the Fit3 has seen "good progress" against these targets between October and December 2006, "as well as delivering wider health and safety benefits beyond the PSA" (HSC paper HSC/07/26⁷). Fit3's status overall remains amber/green (the second-highest performance level - see PSA targets above for further explanation). Although statistics for the year to April 2006 show "movement in the right direction" in all three targets, they still represent "a considerable challenge", particularly the rate of fatal and major injuries. There has been continued improvement in the production sector, "which the HSE has targeted and engaged", but "a challenge remains in the service sector, where the sheer size of the industry combined with rising major injury rates, results in large numbers of injuries." With Fit3 now in its second half, the HSE stresses that there is a "critical need to realise and sustain the benefits from work that Fit3 has initiated". The HSE also warns that the HSC/E's "current resource climate … has created pressures across Fit3 (including inability to renew the contracts of much needed communications professionals)". The HSE is now running training to build communications skills and expertise in-house. Also, recording and reporting mechanisms "make it difficult to link inputs to outcomes".

Merger

Consultation closed on 5 March 2007 on HSC proposals to merge with the HSE into a single authority (HSB 355 p.9). The HSE received 162 responses, of which 129 answered the questions asked by the document. The HSE advises that the majority of the responses agreed with the merger in principle, but some sought assurances that the merger would "fulfil [the HSC/E's] overarching aims such as remaining independent and at arm's length from ministers, and, more importantly, continuing to reflect the interests of employers and employees". The HSC was due to discuss the results on 17 April 2007 and decide whether to proceed with the merger and, if so, which legislative route to take. The HSE hoped to announce the outcome of the meeting and its next steps by 27 April 2007. The consultation, which was launched on 5 December 2006, envisages the HSC becoming the governing body of the new authority, though "retaining its current independence and links with stakeholders while strengthening its capacity to challenge and support delivery". The proposals reflect changes in the UK's industrial base since 1974 and possible public confusion about the HSE and HSC. The consultation document claims that the merger, which should be in place by mid-2008, will offer: a more accountable structure, improved decision making and a clearer public and regulatory presence; continued independence; "a balanced structure, at arm's length from ministers"; and membership drawn from employer, employee and local government representatives, and a member who will link with the devolved authorities. A stronger voice for health and safety, CD 210¹ or www.hse.gov.uk/consult/live.htm. See also: HSC paper 06/57⁷.

Procurement

In March 2007, the HSE revamped its website for companies wishing to sell products and services to it: www.hse.gov.uk/sellingtohse/index.htm (HSB 357 p.5).

Minister

On 9 January 2007, Lord McKenzie of Luton was appointed a parliamentary under-secretary at the Department for Work and Pensions, with responsibility for health and safety (HSB 356 p.4). Philip Hunt, his predecessor, was promoted. McKenzie has no known health and safety experience. Details: www.dwp.gov.uk.

Equality

In December 2006, the HSC published on its website the HSC/E's Equality schemes framework on disability and gender. The HSC approved the schemes on 7 November 2006 (HSC paper HSC/06/91) (HSB 354 p.9). Consultation on the draft schemes closed on 18 October 2006. All public authorities are required to publish a disability equality scheme by 4 December 2006 and a gender equality scheme by 6 April 2007. The HSC/E's consultation started on 3 October 2006: Equality schemes framework: disability equality scheme, gender equality scheme, www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd209.htm.

Published

Health and safety management and business economic performance. An econometric study, RR510, www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr510.pdf (HSB 356 p.9); Measuring up … performance report 2006, www.hse.gov.uk/aboutus/reports/performance (HSB 355 p.9). The HSE added five short reports to its "horizon scanning website", on recycling, obesity, nanotechnology, keyboards and flexible working patterns: www.hsenews.com/2007/01/08/5-reports-on-
horizon-scanning/ (HSB 356 p.4).

Legislation

see also Enforcement

In force

Three sets of Regulations came into force on 6 April 2007: the Work At Height (Amendment) Regulations 2007; the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007; and the Biocidal Products (Amendment) Regulations 2007. Two changes are scheduled for October 2007: new Regulations to control dust in coal mines; and implementation of Directive 2006/15/EC, which contains a second list of Indicative Occupational Exposure Limit Values.

The HSE announced in 2005 that domestically initiated legislation would come into force on just two "common commencement days" each year - 6 April and 1 October (HSB 337 p.2). Wherever possible, the HSE hopes to use the same dates for EU-originating legislation.

Reasonable practicability

The UK won a significant initial victory in a European Court of Justice (ECJ) case concerning its use of "so far as is reasonably practicable" (SFAIRP) in health and safety legislation (HSB 356 p.11). The European Commission has long argued that the UK's implementation of art. 5(1) of the Framework Directive by the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1992 (MHSW) (and subsequently their 1999 successors) is inadequate. This is because the Framework Directive sets an absolute duty, whereas the UK's implementing MHSW Regulations are subject to s.2(1) of the HSW Act, which qualifies an employer's duty to ensure the health and safety of its employees with "reasonable practicability" (HSB 353 p.6). But on 18 January 2007, the ECJ's advocate general found that the "commission's arguments are based on an incorrect interpretation" of the Directive. Although not bound to follow the Opinion of its advocate general, the ECJ usually does so; the judgment of the ECJ is expected by mid-2007: Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi, curia.europa.eu/en/actu/activites/index.htm.

In a separate case, the House of Lords declined the HSE's petition to appeal to the House of Lords for definitive guidance on what it is reasonably practicable for an employer to do to satisfy its duties under the HSW Act. The appeal follows a Court of Appeal ruling on 22 May 2006 in R v HTML that the issue of foreseeability was potentially relevant to what was reasonably practicable (HSB 350 p.7). The HSE advises that the Lords said they were not prepared to consider an appeal "at this stage in the hearings" and that the Court of Appeal's judgment is authoritative. The HTML case was, as a result, due to have begun at Teesside Crown Court on 8 January 2007, but the Recorder of Middlesborough was unable to start the case, which has now been deferred until 2 July 2007.

Goldplating

In November 2006, the HSC/E were cleared by a government-backed review of alleged "gold-plated" over-implementation of EU legislation. Further, the review highlighted the UK's extension to the self-employed of health and safety Directives as an example of "justified" gold-plating. The review, which was led by a former solicitor general for Scotland, Neil Davidson, looked at the transposition and enforcement of EU legislation. Davidson concluded that inappropriate over-implementation "may not be as widespread as is sometimes claimed", although he identified a small number of "cases of over-implementation in the stock of existing [non-health and safety] legislation that should be addressed".

Davidson attributes incorrect allegations to: the requirements of the Directives themselves, rather than their implementation; the benefits to the UK economy of sometimes exceeding EU minimum standards; and the fact that although the UK may use more words than other member states when implementing legislation, this may make life simpler, rather than more burdensome, for employers. Davidson also found a lack of evidence to support the belief that the UK implements and enforces more rigorously than other EU countries. In terms of health and safety Directives, Davidson recommends that the HSC/E "continue to consult on whether it is appropriate to extend their scope to the self-employed, and ensure that the benefits justify the costs. In low-risk sectors, the HSE should consider exempting the self-employed from the legislation." Davidson review: final report, www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/regulation/news/2006/061128.asp. The review completed its public consultation stage on 25 May 2006 (HSB 349 p.3): the 160 responses listed relatively few examples of over-implementation of health and safety Directives, but cited the extension of legislation to the self-employed and the major hazards Seveso II Directive as examples. Davidson review: summary of responses to call for evidence, 19 July 2006, and other information: www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/regulation/reviewing_regulation/davidson_review/.

Website

Full texts of all HSE-enforced health and safety legislation are now available at: www.hse.gov.uk/legislation/index.htm (HSB 354 p.10).

Local authorities

Enforcement

The average fine for a health and safety prosecution taken by local authorities in 2005/06 was £8,729. The average is based on returns from 76 local authorities, county councils and fire authorities. Of the remainder, 122 sent a "nil return" and 259 did not bother to reply. Health and safety offences and penalties in local authority-enforced sectors 2005/2006
(PDF format, 976K) (HSB 355 p.9).

Working together

On 14 December 2006, the Local Authority Coordinators of Regulatory Services (LACORS) claimed that the "new" HSE-local authority partnership had "much improved" the relationship between the two regulators (HSB 355 p.10). Under the "Working together" banner, the partnership has already spawned several local and national initiatives of note (HSB 346 p.17 and 349 p.15). LACORS annual report 2006, www.hsenews.com/2006/12/14/lacors-working-together-annual-report/.

Call centres

The HSE revised its advice on health and safety in call centres on 23 October 2006 (HSB 354 p.9). The local authority circular (LAC) is aimed at LA enforcement officers and call centre managers, and health and safety officers. The circular replaces LAC94/1(rev) (HSB 307 p.19). Advice regarding call centre working practices, LAC94/2, www.hse.gov.uk/lau/lacs/94-2.htm.

Major hazards

see also Chemicals

Buncefield

On 12 October 2006, the Buncefield Standards Task Group, which includes the HSE, told operators of oil-storage sites similar to Buncefield that they must implement eight safety improvements in the first half of 2007 (HSB 354 p.8). Buncefield Standards Task Group: initial report, www.hse.gov.uk/comah/alert.htm. The December 2005 explosion at the Buncefield fuel depot was probably caused by ignition of a vapour cloud from an overflowing fuel tank, according to the Major Incident Investigation Board's "initial" report (PDF format, 5.36MB). The report followed three progress reports (HSB 350 p.2, HSB 349 p.2 and 347 p.10). The board published a fifth report on 29 March 2007: www.buncefieldinvestigation.gov.uk/.

Planning advice

Consultation will end on 22 May 2007 on HSE proposals to shape its policy on the advice given to planning authorities when they consider applications that are near to large-scale petrol-storage facilities (HSB 357 p.5). The proposals arise from the Buncefield explosion (see above). The consultation, which started on 28 February 2007, covers four options. A consultative document on proposals for revised policies for HSE advice on development and control around large-scale petrol-storage depots, www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd211.htm.

BP

In March 2007, the US Chemical Safety Board's final report into the BP Texas City refinery explosion criticised BP officials at all levels for doing "too little, too late". Fifteen workers were killed in the explosion in March 2005 (HSB 342 p.5). Investigation report: refinery explosion and fire (PDF format, 5.36MB) report no. 2005-04-I-TX. An independent review by a former US secretary of state, James Baker, of BP's safety culture in the US had earlier criticised its British-based board for inadequate leadership and a corporate "blind spot" that led it to focus on personal safety at the expense of process safety (HSB 356 p.5). The review, which was published in January 2007, also highlighted the company's short-term approach, decentralised management system and an entrepreneurial culture that gave local refinery managers too much discretion. The report of the BP US refineries independent safety review panel (PDF format, 2.29MB).

Published

Revised land use planning arrangements around large-scale petroleum depots, RR 511¹ or www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr511.htm; Review of significance of societal risk for proposed revision to land use planning arrangements for large-scale petroleum storage sites, RR 512¹ or www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr512.htm; and Developing process safety indicators, HSG254, ISBN 0 7176 6180 6, £11.95 (HSB 354 p.10)¹. The HSE added five sections to its advice on human factors in the major hazards industries, covering alarm handling, interfaces, safety-critical communication, supervision and behavioural safety: www.hse.gov.uk/humanfactors/comah/index.htm (HSB 356 p.4).

Manslaughter

Corporate manslaughter

The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill has made significant parliamentary progress since the last state-of-play table. Following publication on 20 July 2006 (HSB 352 p.11, the Bill completed its Commons second reading on 10 October 2006, committee on 31 October (HSB 354 p.3), and report and third reading on 4 December (HSB 355 p.3); and Lords second reading on 20 December (HSB 355 p.3), committee on 18 January 2007, report stage on 5 February (HSB 356 pp.1 and 3) and third reading on 28 February (HSB 357 p.4). The Bill is now back in the Commons awaiting consideration of the Lords' amendments. The Bill has seen significant amendments since it first appeared before the Commons, notably: changes to the senior management test; the inclusion of some unincorporated bodies and all deaths in prison and in police and other types of custody within the offence; a new power for courts to make "publicity orders" for convicted organisations; and strengthening of the provisions on remedial orders. There were several unsuccessful attempts to introduce offences and sanctions for individual directors. Home Secretary John Reid threatened to drop the Bill if the Lords brought deaths in custody within its scope, although, having had his bluff called, he has not done so. Latest version of the Bill: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/pabills/200607/corporate_manslaughter_and_corporate_
homicide.htm.

The proposed offence will replace the application to organisations of the current common law offence of manslaughter. The new offence will concern the way in which an organisation's senior managers manage or organise its activities causes a death and amounts to a gross breach of a duty of care. The offence would get round the problem with the current law, which has provoked public outrage by confining successful convictions to smaller organisations where a director or other "controlling mind" can be similarly convicted. The only penalties are an unlimited fine and a remedial order, and there are no sanctions against individuals (who will nonetheless remain subject to the common law offence). The offence will apply to all corporations and most Crown and public bodies and will cover Scotland, where it will be known as "corporate homicide", as well as the rest of the UK.

The Bill included most of the changes promised by the Home Office in its response to the recommendations of a December 2005 joint report from two House of Commons committees (HSB 346 p.7): Draft Corporate Manslaughter Bill, HC 540-1, www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmhaff.htm#reports. The Home Office's response, issued on 8 March 2006, accepted one of the committees' most significant recommendations concerning the need to replace the "senior management test" that is at the heart of the new offence. It advised that the new test would instead concentrate on the way in which an organisation as a whole managed an activity that led to a death (HSB 347 p.1). Draft Corporate Manslaughter Bill: the government reply to the first joint report from the home affairs and work and pensions committees, session 2005/06, HC 540,

Consultation closed on 17 June 2005 on the government's initial draft Bill. The government published the draft Bill shortly before the 2005 general election (HSB 338 p.9). The Home Office originally consulted on a new offence of corporate killing in May 2000, four years after the Law Commission had issued similar proposals. Consultation on the Home Office's first proposals ended on 1 September 2000. The Home Office received 166 responses: nearly all favoured change, as did the HSC (HSB 292 p.5, HSB 329 p.1 and 332 p.4).

Prison

There have been two prison sentences for manslaughter in the period covered by this table. A Crown Prosecution Service appeal against the leniency of a suspended prison sentence resulted in the Court of Appeal sentencing Michael Shaw, the managing director of a small firm, Change of Style Ltd, to an immediate 15-month custodial term on 4 October 2006 (HSB 354 p.1). A German lorry driver, Andreas Klassen, who fell asleep at his wheel, was imprisoned on 26 February 3007 for killing four motorists in September 2006 (HSB 357 p.4).

On 1 March 2007, the Court of Appeal changed a nine-year prison sentence imposed on a railway subcontractor for the manslaughter of four railway maintenance workers. The court reduced the sentence to seven years.

Manual handling

Published

Furniture distribution guidance: Warehouse to delivery(PDF format, 331K), HSL/2006/87, (HSB 354 p.10).

Manufacturing

Paper industry

The paper industry has seen a 32% drop in major injuries since March 2004, according to the Confederation of Paper Industries² (HSB 357 p.5). The HSE said that it was encouraged by the effect of the strategy of the paper and board industry advisory committee since 2005: Making a difference, www.hse.gov.uk/paper/programme.htm.

Mines

Dust

The draft Coal Mines (Inhalable Dust) Regulations 2005 have again been delayed and will now come into force on 1 October 2007. The Regulations cover the control of inhalable dust below ground in coal mines. Although the regime was completed in time for an October 2005 implementation, the need for - and subsequent familiarisation with - a suitable light pump for the sampler caused delays. Consultation closed on 28 May 2004 on the HSC's proposals to replace the Coal Mine (Respirable Dust) Regulations 1975 with a modern risk-based framework. The consultation elicited nine responses and the HSE's analysis confirmed the support of the mining industry for the proposals. (Many of the important potential consultees were members of the group that drew up the document, so they did not comment.) The final version of the Regulations will be similar to the proposals; the main change arising from the consultation is more information in the Approved Code of Practice on respirable protective equipment. Proposals for the control of inhalable dust in coal mines, CD 194, free¹.

Musculoskeletal disorders

Backs campaign

The HSE's Better Backs campaign started on 9 October 2006 (HSB 354 p.9). The campaign included poster advertising on 2,000 sites nationwide, commercial radio adverts "reaching 15 million people", 150 pieces of media coverage, 36,000 campaign packs distributed, 57,000 website visitors and 15,000 poster downloads (HSC paper 07/25⁷). The expensive campaign is different in style to anything the HSE has done previously, which prompted some members of the HSC to ask at its meeting on 17 October 2006 whether the agency that the HSE had used had spent the money appropriately (HSB 354 p.9). Details: www.hse.gov.uk/betterbacks/. An earlier campaign ran in 2005.

The HSE published case studies on 24 October 2006 highlighting six factors that can help employers reduce the incidence of musculoskeletal disorders "considerably": Better Backs: www.hse.gov.uk/msd/experience.htm (HSB 354 p.10).

Noise

see also Computer applications, Physical agents

Campaign

A year-long initiative will start in April 2007 to eliminate new cases of occupational-induced hearing damage (HSB 352 p.10). The initiative is the second part of a two-year physical agents programme (see Vibration below). Details: www.hse.gov.uk/noise.

Music

On 9 January 2007, the HSC delayed consultation on draft guidance on the Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 for the music and entertainment sector (HSB 355 p.11). The HSC asked the HSE and industry representatives to look again at the text, claiming that the length, complexity and all-encompassing approach meant that the sector would ignore it and give the media a "field day" with stories of killjoy regulation. The HSC still hopes to publish the final guidance by the end of 2007. The sector has until 6 April 2008 in which to meet the Regulations, ie two years longer than anyone else.

Acoustic shock

The Acoustic Safety Programme (ASP) revealed research showing that two in three call centres do not have written policies on avoiding and dealing with "acoustic shock": The UK contact centre operational review 2006, summary, www.contactbabel.com (HSB 355 p.4).

Nuclear

see also Energy

Energy Review

On 11 January 2007, as part of the government's Energy Review, the HSE published a Guide to regulatory processes for generic design assessment of new nuclear power stations; Nuclear power station generic design assessment - guidance to requesting parties; Process and information document for generic assessment of candidate nuclear power plants, www.hse.gov.uk/nuclear/reactors/index.htm (HSB 356 p.4). Comments on the guidance: newreactorbuild@hse.gsi.gov.uk.

Thorp

The HSE granted consent on 10 January 2007 for the restart of the Thorp facility at the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant (HSB 356 p.4)². The plant shut down after a leak of radioactive liquid inside a shielded facility, for which the licensee, British Nuclear Group Sellafield Ltd, was fined £500,000 in October 2006 (HSB 354 p.2). Investigation report: www.hse.gov.uk/nuclear/thorp.htm (HSB 357 p.5).

Incidents

There was one reportable nuclear incident at nuclear installations in Britain between 1 July and 30 September 2006, at Hunterston B Power Station (HSB 355 p.10). Statement of nuclear incidents at nuclear installations: third quarter 2006⁵. There were no reportable incidents in the previous six months.

Waste

The HSE is revising its Joint guidance on radioactive waste management. Consultation closes on 31 May 2001 on part 1 of the guidance: www.hse.gov.uk/nuclear/wastemanage.htm.

Published

Safety assessment principles - 2006, first edition, www.hse.gov.uk/nuclear/saps/index.htm (HSB 355 p.10).

Offshore

see also Working time

Published

Offshore injury, ill-health and incident statistics 2005/06, HSR 2006-1, www.hsenews.com/2007/02/05/offshore-injury-statistics-20052006/ (HSB 356 p.4 and 357 p.1); Avian influenza: avoiding the risk of infection on offshore installations, OIS 2/2007, www.hsenews.com/2007/03/02/avian-influenza-avoiding-the-risk-of-infection
-on-offshore-installations-is22007/ (HSB 357 p.5).

Physical agents

see also Noise, Vibration

Overview

After failures in the 1990s to adopt a single Directive covering all physical agents, the European Commission decided to legislate through individual Directives on groups of physical agents. All four proposals for individual Directives - noise, vibration, electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and optical radiation - have been adopted. In terms of their implementation in the UK: the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005 were laid before parliament on 7 April 2005 and came into force on 6 July 2005 (SI 2005 No.1093)³ (HSB 340 p.15); the Control of Noise at Work Regulations were laid before parliament on 28 June 2005 and came into force on 6 April 2006 (SI 2005 No.1643)³ (HSB 348 p.21); consultation has been delayed on implementing the EMFs Directive (see below); and the optical radiation Directive was adopted in April 2006.

EMFs

EU ministers adopted a Directive on electromagnetic fields (EMFs) on 29 April 2004 (HSB 330 p.7). Member states have four years in which to implement the Directive's provisions. The HSE had hoped to issue a consultative document in summer 2006, with the Regulations in place by April 2008. The document was delayed until early 2007, but has been delayed again. Consultation will be informed by research and two working groups that the HSE has set up. Latest information: www.hse.gov.uk/radiation/nonionising/electro.htm. The Directive requires an employer to carry out a risk assessment and if this demonstrates that the action values are exceeded, it may be necessary to devise and implement an action plan to prevent the corresponding exposure limit values from being exceeded. The Directive also covers warning signs, health surveillance and the provision of information, instruction and training. The HSE played a significant role in the final version of the Directive (HSB 322 p.5 and 321 p.4). Adoption followed amendments made by the European Parliament's employment and social affairs committee (HSB 327 p.6). EU ministers reached political agreement on a common position on 20 October 2003. The HSE says that the Directive is based on the values incorporated in the occupational exposure guidelines issued by the International Commission on Non-ionising Radiation Protection, which are broadly in line with those of the National Radiological Protection Board. Directive2004/40/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (EMFs), OJ L159/30.4.04⁹

Optical radiation

Member states have until 27 April 2010 in which to implement a Directive on optical radiation, which was adopted on 6 April 2006. The European Parliament (EP) gave a second reading, with amendments, on 7 and 8 September 2005 to the proposal. The most significant amendment was the removal of all references to sunlight. EU ministers reached political agreement on the proposal on 7 December 2004 (HSB 335 p.17). The proposal covers electromagnetic radiation in the wavelength range 100nm to 1mm. It includes ultraviolet, visible, and infrared radiations and lasers. The legislation - before the EP's amendments - introduced specific requirements for employers when assessing the risks to their workers' health and safety resulting from their exposure to optical radiation. Directive
2006/25/EC … on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of
workers to risks arising from physical agents (artificial optical radiation) (19th individual Directive within the meaning of article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) (PDF format, 802K)⁹, L 114/27.4.06⁹ or. The HSE will post updates on implementation plans at: www.hse.gov.uk/radiation/nonionising/optical.htm.

Participation

In late 2006, the HSE launched a pilot project to develop worker involvement in tackling noise and hand-arm vibration (HAV) risks in the manufacturing and construction sectors. The HSE is running the pilot with the EEF, the Construction Federation, FMB and the UCATT and GMB unions (HSB 355 p.10). The worker involvement (managing noise and HAV risks) project, www.hse.gov.uk/vibration/hav/workerinvolvement/index.htm.

Public safety

see also Enforcement, Risk

Enforcement

The HSE published the advice that it gives inspectors on investigating suspected breaches of s.3 of the HSW Act (which sets out an employer's general duties to persons other than its employees affected by its undertaking). The HSE hopes that the document will assist its staff "in the exercise of discretion when selecting incidents for investigation" under the "broad" scope of s.3, albeit in line with the Enforcement policy statement of the HSC (see Enforcement (Policy statement) above and HSB 356 p.4). General guidance on how HSE selects incidents for investigation under breaches of s.3 of the HSW Act 1974, www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/hswact/index.htm.

Principles

The HSE advises it is keeping a "watching brief" on public safety issues in the light of the HSC's decision on 17 October 2006 to subsume the HSE's development work on principles of public safety into its wider risk management principles, and is currently analysing the responses to its consultation, which ended on 30 November 2007 (see Risk below). Consultation closed on 30 September 2005 on an HSE discussion document: A proposed statement by the HSC on the public safety role of the HSE, DDE23 07/05, (PDF format, 121K) (HSB 342 p.3).

The HSE received 59 responses, including those to an online questionnaire: HSE's role in public safety: discussion document questionnaire. The discussion document envisaged that the six public safety principles would illustrate how sensible risk management would work in practice in the context of public safety regulation. These six principles premised that the HSE would: apply its expertise to provide public assurance that risks in the major hazard industries are properly managed; continue to work with other regulators that have public safety duties, and specific expertise, to promote a coherent overall approach to public safety, including greater clarity of responsibilities among the regulatory bodies; not generally seek to regulate in a manner that unnecessarily restricts the liberty of the individual to engage in certain hazardous activities; consider giving priority to intervention when the risks to the public from a particular work activity and the risks to workers from that same work activity are linked; try to ensure that, where possible and appropriate, risks to public safety that arise in a particular locality are dealt with by those within that locality; and, where circumstances demand, provide its unique expertise in the control and management of risk to pressing issues of public and national concern.

The consultation reflected the HSC's strategy until 2010, which commits the HSE to moving away from intervening in those areas of public safety that are better regulated by others or by other means. The HSE's analysis of the responses found no clear agreement on the principles, although all agreed that public safety was important and that the HSE's approach was consistent with the sensible risk management principles. There was wide recognition that prioritisation was essential, and respondents generally welcomed the exercise as a sensible way forward for the HSE to manage its resources (HSC paper HSC/05/71⁷).

Regulation

see also Enforcement, Legislation

Portal

The HSE launched a Better Regulation portal on 21 December 2006 (www.hse.gov.uk/regulation/index.htm) (HSB 355 p.10). The site brings together HSC/E initiatives around the government's "Better regulation" agenda, including links to the HSE's simplification plan (see below), revised advice on risk management, a list of health and safety legislation, and an opportunity to suggest examples of "red tape and bureaucracy" for removal (simplification@hse.gsi.gov.uk).

Published

Risk, responsibility and regulation: whose risk is it anyway?, Better Regulation Commission, www.brc.gov.uk (HSB 355 p.7).

Simplification plan

The government unveiled "simplification plans" from 19 government departments and agencies, including the HSC/E, on 11 December 2006 that, it claims, will save employers £2 billion in administrative costs (www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/regulation/reform/simplifying/plans.asp). The Better Regulation Commission described the HSC/E's "simplification plan" as a "good start", but called on it to look at ways of offering "autonomy" to organisations that show good health and safety practice (www.brc.gov.uk/news/2006/061011.asp) (HSB 354 p.5). In March 2007, the HSE advised that "it is generally too early to give a definitive view of whether the projects included [in its simplification plan] will deliver to timetable", although "monitoring of the key initiatives indicates that most are progressing as planned" (HSC paper MISC/07/08⁷). The first annual update of the plan will be published in November 2007, following consideration by the HSC in October 2007.

Published on 11 October 2006, the HSC/E's simplification plan looks at how the HSE can reduce the "administrative burden" of health and safety legislation, for example unnecessary paperwork, "while at the same time restating [its] commitment to maintaining/increasing levels of protection". It sets out seven "key initiatives" for simplification (HSB 353 p.1): sensible risk management; gas safety; form-filling; Regulations on lifting operations and work equipment; the provision of information to employees; the construction Regulations; and the COSHH Regulations. Much of the plan is a description of the HSE's ongoing work in this area. As with other government departmental plans, the HSE's plan must achieve a 25% reduction in the burden by 2010. The HSE reports that there were difficulties in agreeing a baseline administrative cost with the Cabinet Office against which to measure the savings, but finally agreed a total of £2.03 billion, ie a target reduction of £508 million.

The plan originated from a March 2005 recommendation by the Better Regulation Task Force. The HSE consulted on an initial draft in late 2005, proposing 15 areas for action to deliver its contribution to the government's better regulation agenda: HSC/E draft simplification plan: www.hse.gov.uk/consult/live.htm (Inspection truce for compliant employers). Most of the areas were merely progress reports and timetables for existing initiatives. A total of 22 stakeholders made suggestions for simplification; the HSE accepted nine and rejected five, with the remainder still under consideration. On 5 March 2007, the HSE published a July 2006 report that informed its plan: HSE: administrative burdens measurement exercise - final report, www.hsenews.com/2007/03/05/administrative-burdens-measure-exercise-final-report/ (HSB 357 p.5).

RIDDOR

Under-reporting

An HSE-commissioned study of a hospital in Liverpool found that the main reason why employers report accidents appears to be whether or not time is lost from work. The research also found that only 30% of statutorily reportable accidents were reported (HSB 357 p.5). An investigation of reporting of workplace accidents under RIDDOR using the Merseyside Accident Information Model, RR 528¹ or www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr528.htm.

Risk

see also Enforcement, Public safety

"Sensible" principles

Consultation closed on 30 November 2006 on the HSE's draft set of principles on sensible risk management (HSB 352 p.10). The HSE reports that it had a "great response" and is currently considering the ideas that were submitted. The principles are elucidated in five short sentences on what such management should comprise, for example "ensuring that workers and the public are properly protected", and five on what they should not be about, for example "creating a totally risk-free society". Principles and latest position: www.hse.gov.uk/risk/index.htm.

In July 2005, the HSE instigated a "debate" on a sensible approach to risk management (HSB 342 p.3), using "round table" events, a web forum on safety, a discussion document on public safety (see Public safety above), and a major public sector conference. The online debate elicited 450 responses. The initiative followed a speech by Prime Minister Tony Blair on 26 May 2005 on the UK's alleged "compensation culture", in which he called for a debate on risk. The forum closed on 5 October 2005 and the HSE published on 7 November 2005 a summary of the debate, the main issues and what it proposed doing as a result: Risk debate - final summary. This advised that the HSE would: distinguish clearly in all communications between "risk aversion" and "excessive risk aversion"; commission research to determine the extent of disproportionate decisions on risk in industry (respondents felt that decisions were generally well balanced); draft a set of principles on risk management; commission further research into the perception of a "compensation culture"; and review its Five steps guidance to emphasise that risk assessment is a means to an end, not an end in itself. The HSE's subsequent actions involved: research into the scale of, and drivers for, excessive risk aversion; work with stakeholders to develop a shared understanding of what sensible risk management is - and is not - about (the "principles"); a review and revision of guidance on risk assessment, including Five steps and the HSE's web pages.

Safety reps

Involvement

On 15 March 2007, the HSC approved the HSE's "way forward" on how best to encourage worker involvement and representation in health and safety. The work programme will see the HSE: simplify and update the safety representatives' "Brown Book" (the ACoP and guidance) and other guidance; "mainstream" worker involvement, particularly in construction and the public sector; promote worker involvement to HSE and LA field staff; and work with others to encourage worker involvement. The HSE reported insufficient evidence of benefits to proceed with two legislative changes that would have required employers to consult safety reps on risk assessments and to respond to recommendations (HSC paper HSC/07/12⁷). Comments on the HSC's proposals closed on 8 September 2006 (HSB 349 p.19): Improving worker involvement - improving health and safety, CD 207, www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd207.htm. The HSC had proposed three "strategic pillars": legislative changes; improved guidance; and measures to "encourage employers", notably voluntary standards. The HSE received around 400 replies to its consultation document and held meetings with stakeholders "on all sides of the argument … Many of the written replies were from safety representatives, who expressed strong views about the need for more legislation and for it to be enforced more strictly." These views were "balanced by replies from employers and employers' organisations, who generally argued for a less prescriptive approach." The consultation document reflected an HSE paper considered by the HSC on 14 February 2006 (HSC/06/19⁷), which responded to a request made by the HSC at its February 2005 meeting that the HSE look at new duties on employers in three areas: Plans for the worker involvement programme, HSC paper HSC/05/16⁷ (HSB 338 p.5). Overall, the "HSE's Regulatory Challenge Panel considered the proposals and found the case for regulation was not made". Nevertheless, the HSC decided to issue the consultative document, and the case was again not found to be made.

Strategic programme

The HSC accepted the HSE's recommendation to wind up the worker involvement programme. According to the HSE: "The impetus of being a programme has been immensely useful in kick-starting activity, but the HSE now believes that further improvements can be secured by managing the work in a more traditional way. It has therefore decided to move the programme on to a 'benefits realisation' phase in which the learning from the programme is embedded into HSE and local authority practice" (HSC paper HSC/07/12⁷).

WSAs

The Worker Safety Adviser (WSA) initiative ended with the closure of the WSA Challenge Fund in March 2007 (HSB 355 p.5 and 354 p.10). The HSC made its decision on 7 November, approving an HSE recommendation that "mainstreaming its lessons should be worked up as part of current HSE thinking on how best to offer advice and support to small and medium-sized enterprises". HSE paper: Worker involvement: proposals on the future of
the WSA initiative and first findings from the consultation exercise (PDF format, 159K) HSC paper HUSK/06/88.

Facilities

Consultation closed on 29 March 2007 on a Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) consultation on Workplace representatives: a review of their facilities and facility time. The DTI is currently analysing the responses. The review asks: whether new methods of working seriously affect the ability of workplace representatives to function; and whether the effectiveness and efficiency of representatives can be enhanced. The HSC's response emphasises that the HSC/E: values the contribution of representatives; recognises a need to promote representation in non-unionised workplaces; wants to increase the diversity of representatives in terms of age, gender and ethnicity; advises that representatives help control risks; a lack of training is a problem, but not an insurmountable one; would welcome improved links between guidance from different government departments on representatives; and would like to see firm evidence of any case for change. (HSC response and paper: MISC/07/08⁷).

Slips and trips

see also Computer applications

Watch Your Step

An evaluation of the HSE's Watch Your Step campaign has found that, while the campaign succeeded in raising awareness of the significance of slips and trips, it secured few sustained improvements in dutyholders' actions to address slips and trips. The HSE advises that over the next year its communications and inspection will target in particular - but not exclusively - the education sector and the cleaning and catering industries. Watch Your Step: final evaluation report, HSE and Synovate, 20 December 2006. The HSE intends publishing the report online in May. Slips and trips information: www.hse.gov.uk/slips.

Published

Slips and trips in icy conditions, www.hse.gov.uk/slips/faq.htm#icyconditions (HSB 356 p.4).

SMEs

Business involvement

SMEs will continue as a priority for the HSE, under HSE plans to "reprioritise" its work on business involvement (see Business involvement).

Health

A new advice service for SMEs and their employees started on 23 February 2006. Workplace Health Connect (formerly "Direct") comprises an advice line, website and "solving pathfinders", who will visit workplaces (details: www.workplacehealthconnect.co.uk/ or www.hse.gov.uk/workplacehealth/service.htm; tel: 0845 609 6006). An HSE-commissioned evaluation of the first eight months of the initiative found that, as of November 2006, fewer than 4,000 calls had been received by the advice line, falling significantly short of planned levels. Calls peaked during summer 2006 and then fell gradually, which "is likely to reflect the lack of national or specific advertising undertaken to promote the [advice line]". Nevertheless, take-up of the workplace visit element was "robust" and remains on track to reach planned levels. As of November 2006, 1,800 SMEs had been referred for visits and 1,130 adviser visits conducted. The HSE claims that the report shows that the "early positive signs have been confirmed … [and] the service has so far successfully engaged with employers representing over 305,000 employees, with the overall level of satisfaction with the service extremely high". Workplace Health Connect: January 2007 progress report, Institute for Employment Studies, www.hse.gov.uk/workplacehealth/evaluation.htm. Earlier progress report: HSE chief executive's report to the HSC, 25 July 2006⁷. The HSE announced on 2 February 2005 that it would run the £20 million pilot scheme (HSB 337 p.4). The initiative is part of the Department for Work and Pensions' five-year strategy for getting people off benefits and back into work. The project is running in five pilot regions: Greater London, the North East, the North West, South Wales and the West Midlands. The HSE claims that the "exciting major project" is "on a scale unlike anything we have done before". The wider health agenda: an update on occupational health, HSC paper HSC/05/56⁷.

Published

Six SME case studies that demonstrate the business benefit of effective management of occupational health and safety, RR504, www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr504.htm (HSB 354 p.10).

Smoking

Ban

The government announced on 1 December 2006 that the ban on smoking in enclosed public spaces in England will start on 1 July 2007 (HSB 355 p.6). A similar ban has operated in Scotland since 26 March 2006 (see 'That's the way to do it' - the Scottish smoking ban) and in Wales since 2 April 2007 (www.smokingbanwales.co.uk/english/), and will come into force in Northern Ireland on 30 April 2007 (www.spacetobreathe.org.uk/).

The principle of the ban in England is introduced by the Health Act 2006³, which received royal assent on 19 July 2006. The detail is contained in three sets of Regulations: the Smoke-Free (Premises and Enforcement) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006 No.3368); the Smoke-free (Penalties and Discounted Amounts) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007 No.764); and the Smoke-free (Signs) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007 No.923³), which were laid before parliament on 18 December 2006, 7 March 2007 and 23 March 2007. Consultation on the three sets of draft Regulations ended on 9 October 2006 (HSB 352 p.2): Smoke-free premises and vehicles. Consultation on proposed Regulations to be made under powers in the Health Bill. The provisions in the Act and Regulations are similar to those reported in HSB 346 p.10, ie any parts of premises that are enclosed have to be smoke-free when open to the public. But workplaces must be smoke-free at all times if they are used by more than one person (even at different times) or where members of the public might attend to seek goods or services. The Act is explicit that all pubs and private clubs are included in the ban. The Act requires: any person who occupies, or is concerned in the management of, smoke-free premises, to display a no-smoking sign; any person who controls, or is concerned in the management of, smoke-free premises "to cause a person smoking there to stop smoking"; and all persons not to smoke on smoke-free premises. The Regulations set out the types of premises that will be allowed to designate rooms for smoking, and exempt a small number of activities.

^Stress

Occupational health services

On 7 February 2007, the Court of Appeal handed down a significant judgment on compensation for work-related stress. "Clarifying" its earlier decision in Hatton v Sutherland that "an employer that offers a confidential advice service, with referral to appropriate counselling or treatment services, is unlikely to be found in breach of duty", the court said that such provision would not automatically discharge liability: Daw v Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 70 (HSB 357 p.13).

Good practice

The HSE published further online case studies in early 2007 of stress management policies and interventions. The sectors now include education, health, finance and services: www.hse.gov.uk/stress/experience.htm?ebul=hsegen/20-nov-06&cr=7.

Substance abuse

Published

Don't mix it!, INDG240, www.hsenews.com/2007/01/04/dont-mix-it/ (aimed at SMEs) (HSB 356 p.4).

Transport - workplace

see also Computer applications

Standards

Consultation ended on 22 September 2006 on an HSE-proposed "route map" for managing workplace transport (HSB 351 p.7). The map is an online tool that will help employers follow best practice and meet their legal responsibilities, including setting out alternative ways to comply where these exist. The proposed tool would focus on site layout and design, vehicle selection and maintenance, personnel matters and management responsibilities. The HSE reports that responses to the consultation were "very encouraging" and that the HSC will consider a paper on the responses and a way forward at its meeting on 15 May 2007. Subject to the HSC's agreement, the HSE will start to build the main site, which will incorporate existing guidance and eventually include new or additional guidance on issues that emerged from the consultation. These include medical fitness to work, the introduction of alcohol and drugs policies and maintenance of vehicles. The HSE advises that much of the guidance already exists, but can be difficult to find. The HSE hopes to have the main part of the site operational in September 2007. Consultation started on 5 June 2006 and also involved three public meetings. Managing workplace transport risk - a route map, www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/routemap.htm. WS Atkins, the National Engineering Laboratory and the Transport Research Laboratory assisted the HSE in the preparatory work. HSC paper HSC/05/07⁷.

Published

Knowledge of workplace transport hazards amongst British businesses, HSE RR 523¹ or www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr523.htm (HSB 357 p.11); Evaluation into the success of occupational health and safety regulators and organisations' use of expert systems, HSE RR 508, www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr508.htm (HSB 355 p.8).

Vibration

see also Computer applications, Physical agents

Campaign

The HSE launched a two-year programme on 10 July 2006 to reduce exposure to two common physical agents: vibration and noise (HSB 352 p.10). The first year (which actually started in April 2006) helped employers control new cases of hand-arm vibration syndrome "sufficiently to enable workers to remain at work without disability". Details: www.hse.gov.uk/vibration. The initiative follows the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005 (HSB 341 p.13).

Violence

see also Health services

NHS

Consultation closed on 1 September 2006 on Department of Health (DH) proposals for new legislative powers to deal with nuisance or disturbance behaviour on NHS premises (HSB 351 p.7). The offence will be included in a forthcoming Home Office Bill because the DH does not have its own space in the parliamentary timetable. Under the proposals, people who threaten or verbally abuse NHS staff would face a fine of up to £1,000, and NHS bodies would have the power to remove offenders from the premises if they do not need treatment. The powers are necessary because existing public order or anti-social behaviour legislation may not cover low-level nuisance or disturbance behaviour. The DH received 158 responses to the consultation. It reports that the "overall tone of the responses was positive, with certain issues raised that needed further consideration". Summary of responses: Tackling nuisance and disturbance behaviour on NHS healthcare premises: report on consultation, 1 November 2006, www.dh.gov.uk/en/Consultations/Responsestoconsultations/DH_4140248. Consultative document: Tackling nuisance or disturbance behaviour on NHS healthcare premises: a paper for consultation (PDF format, 93K).

The government should consider regulating violence management training in the NHS, according to research published on 12 October 2006 by the HSE and the NHS Security Management Service: Violence management training: the development of effective trainers in the delivery of violence management training in healthcare settings, HSE RR 495, www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr495.htm (HSB 354 p.7).

Women

Pregnancy

On 5 March 2007, the HSE revealed its redesigned website for new and pregnant mothers: www.hse.gov.uk/mothers/index.htm (HSB 357 p.4). The site also provides the chance to talk to an adviser.

Work at height

see also Construction

Evaluation

An evaluation of the impact after one year of the operation of the Work at Height Regulations 2005, and the removal of the "two-metre rule", found some evidence that businesses are changing how they manage work at height risks:First evaluation of the impact of the Work at Height Regulations. First evaluation of the removal of the "two-metre rule" (PDF format, 2.12MB) (HSB 354 p.11).

Leisure

Regulations came into force on 6 April 2007 to extend the Work at Height Regulations 2005³ to workers who are paid to lead, or train, climbing and caving activities in the adventure activity sector. The Regulations apply to those working in such activities, but not to sport or leisure climbing or caving. The amendments complete implementation of the Work at Height Directive (2000/45/EC). Consultation ran between 1 August and 31 October 2006, eliciting 41 responses that were generally supportive, albeit with some concerns that the changes might weaken the legislation. The HSE is satisfied, however, that there are sufficient safeguards to make the changes. The HSC approved the Regulations on 9 January 2007: HSC paper HSC/07/01⁷. Consultation: Proposal for Work at Height (Amendment) Regulations, CD204, www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/cd204.htm. Further information on the HSE's Falls from Height Programme and guidance on the amending Regulations: www.hse.gov.uk/falls/index.htm.

Working time

Directive - review

EU ministers failed for a fifth time to agree what to do about amendments to the 1993 working time Directive (HSB 354 p.4). Negotiations took place on 7 November 2006 under the Finnish presidency of the EU. The main sticking points continue to be whether or not member states should remain able to allow employers and their workers to opt out from the 48-hour maximum working week and, if so, whether the week should be calculated on the basis of each contract or each worker (HSB 351 p.2). Although a compromise had looked possible at the meeting in Finland, based on a reduction in the overall maximum working limit from 72 to 60 hours, five countries rejected the deal because they wanted to see the opt-out abolished. Progress on the European Commission's review has been frustratingly slow since the European Parliament (EP) voted on 11 May 2005 to end the opt-out (HSB 339 p.3). The vote followed the adoption, in autumn 2004, by the European Commission of a proposal to update the 1993 Directive that would have allowed the UK to continue to opt out, subject to strengthened criteria being met (HSB 333 p.2): Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2003/88/EC concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, COM(2004) 607 final, http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/news/2004/sep/working_time_prop_en.htm, free.

Two other elements of the commission's proposal met with a more conciliatory reaction from the parliament. These are to allow employers to use a one-year reference period to calculate the average 48-hour week, rather than the current four months, and the introduction of a new category of "on-call" time" for doctors (ie neither working nor rest time) to cover the "inactive" part of on-call time. European case law has counted such hours as "working time", but the EP vote would allow member states to weaken this. The proposal and the EP's amendments were considered by EU ministers on 2 June 2005, where the UK sought to restore the opt-out. The UK persuaded a sufficient number of other states to refer to negotiating officials a commission compromise text that would have phased out the opt-out by 2012, but allowed further applications after that date. Ministers held extensive discussions on 8 and 9 December 2005 on a set of compromise texts tabled by the UK, which held the EU presidency at the time. The UK reported "significant progress", but no "overall agreement". The commission's proposal followed a December 2003 paper: Communication from the commission … concerning the re-examination of Directive 93/104/EC concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, COM(2003)843 final, 30 December 2003⁹. Responses to the document resulted in the commission consulting the EU social partners in May 2004 (HSB 331 p.5). Second phase of consultation of the social partners at Community level concerning the revision of Directive 93/104/EC concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (PDF format, 230K).

Offshore

The government confirmed on 24 August 2006 that it will clarify the Working Time Regulations 1998 so that it is explicit that they apply to offshore work in the UK sector of the continental shelf and not just in UK territorial waters (HSB 352 p.7). Offshore employers have long contended that their workers are not entitled to the four weeks' paid annual leave set out in the Regulations because their places of work are outside UK limits. The clarification follows an employment tribunal ruling in May 2005 that the Regulations applied beyond the 12-mile limit. The government said in September 2005 that it was "minded" to clarify the Regulations (HSB 342 p.4), but the amending Regulations have not yet appeared.

Young workers

November 2006 saw the launch of a new Workplace Hazard Awareness Qualification and course for young people on work experience (HSB 354 p.10). The level 3 qualification is aimed at year 10 students and is based on the new national occupational standard for basic hazard awareness developed by ENTO. The package was developed by the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health, British Safety Council Awards, ENTO and the HSE. Teaching materials: www.wiseup2work.co.uk. The HSE also launched a new website on young workers on 23 October: www.hse.gov.uk/youngpeople/index.htm.

There is no reported progress on the implementation of the recommendations made by the Better Regulation Task Force in its report on The regulation of child employment (www.brc.gov.uk). The recommendations include: consolidation of all child-employment legislation; employers registering with local authorities as "employers" of children, rather than applying for a licence; and changes to weekend working hours (HSB 330 p.3).

¹ HSE Books, PO Box 1999, Sudbury, Suffolk CO10 2WA, tel: 01787 881165, fax: 01787 313995, www.hsebooks.co.uk. Priced publications may also be obtained through booksellers. Consultative documents are also available at: www.hse.gov.uk/consult/index.htm. Research reports are available free at: www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/index.htm. Leaflets are also available free at: www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/index.htm.

² HSE InfoLine, tel: 0845 345 0055, www.hse.gov.uk/contact, or written enquiries: HSE Information Services, CaerphillyBusinessPark, Caerphilly CF83 3GG.

³ www.opsi.gov.uk. Priced, hard copy publications are available from: The Stationery Office, PO Box 276, LondonSW8 5DT, tel: 0870 6005522, email: customer.services@tso.co.uk.

⁴ Rose Court, 2 Southwark Bridge, London SE1 9HS.

⁵ www.hse.gov.uk/nuclear/index.htm or Nuclear Safety Directorate, email: nsd.infocentre@hse.gov.uk, tel: 0151 951 3484.

⁶ HSE, National Agricultural Centre, Stoneleigh, Kenilworth, Warwickshire CV8 2LZ, tel: 02476 696518 or www.hse.gov.uk/agriculture.

⁷ www.hse.gov.uk/aboutus/hsc/meetings/index.htm.

⁸ TUC, Congress House, Great Russell Street, LondonWC1B 3LS, tel: 020 7636 4030.

⁹ "Official Journal of the European Union", The Stationery Office, International Sales Agency, 51 Nine Elms Lane, London SW8 5OR, fax: 020 7873 8463.