IOSH SED Manual 2023 PDF

IOSH Safety for Executives
and Directors
Safety for Executives and Directors
IOSH Safety for Executives and

Directors
1
Domestic Arrangements
Emergency arrangements
IMPORTANT INFORMATION
Toilets Domestic arrangements
Smoking
Mobile phones
Other rules?
Domestic arrangements
Fire and safety arrangements
Toilets
Smoking arrangements
Mobile phones
Other Rules?
2
Introducing WorkNest
WorkNest
• In 2019/20, both became part of Marlowe plc, the leaders in
business-critical services and software.
• Our purpose is to empower employers with preventative and
proactive services covering employment law, HR and
occupational health, safety and wellbeing.
• Provides Employment Law, HR and Health & Safety services to
UK employers.
• ISO 14001, OHSAS 18001 and Investors in People recognition.
Introducing WorkNest
Our roots go back to 2001, when Malcolm MacKay founded Law At Work, providing the employment law expertise
of a legal firm, but without the prohibitive pricing. LAW gradually strengthened its offering with the acquisition of
Square Circle HR, employee relations consultancy Empire, Solve HR and Deminos Consulting.
Mark Ellis founded Ellis Whittam in 2004 with an equally revolutionary mission: to provide high-quality
employment law, HR, and health and safety services for businesses that add value not cost, and are based on fair,
fixed fees.
In 2019/20, they became part of Marlowe plc, the leaders in business-critical services and software. Since then, a
number of other like-minded businesses have been added to this team:
HRSP, a trusted partner to the third sector, providing bespoke, cost effective, HR support and strategies.
ESPHR, a new-model employment law firm and employee relations technology business – strategically focused to
help HR professionals transform their ER capabilities.
Youmanage, more than HR software, it’s an operational business tool, helping companies to improve the quality
and effectiveness of their HR management processes.
Cater Leydon Millard, a specialist employment law firm offering a ‘partner-led’ service with focus on the public
and education sector.
CQC Compliance, founded to help healthcare companies ensure continuing regulatory compliance.
DeltaNet and Cylix, e-Learning partners to national and global organisations, helping to shape their training
programme and embed long-term cultures of compliance.
Now we are bringing all these businesses together under the WorkNest brand.
Our purpose is to empower employers with preventative and proactive services covering employment law, HR and
occupational health, safety and wellbeing. The personal, high-quality and responsive services that our clients know
and love will absolutely remain at the heart of what we do. As WorkNest, we will bring together a broader range
of services that will help you to further protect and nurture your organisation.
Our ambition is to be the most highly valued provider of advice, technology and services across these and related
fields.
What we do, and the expertise with which we do it, enables our clients to manage the most sensitive issues. We
believe that when employers are compliant, confident and risk-aware, when employees feel safe, supported and
encouraged, companies can attract the best people, focus on innovation and drive growth.
Our clients tell us that their people are their greatest strength, the same is true for us.
We are blessed with extremely capable and engaged colleagues, determined to support you with informed
commercial advice and digital platforms. We will make WorkNest a diverse, inclusive and welcoming place to work
– the natural home for the UK’s most gifted practitioners in people management, health, safety and wellbeing,
employment law, professional training and business technology.
3
Introducing IOSH
• The Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) -
IOSH
Founded in 1945
• The world's leading professional body for people responsible
for safety and health in the workplace.
• “Our shared objective is a world where work is safe and healthy
for every working person, every day.”
Introducing IOSH
The Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH)

IOSH is the world's leading professional body for people responsible for safety and health in the workplace.
IOSH role: Supporting safety and health professionals

IOSH acts as a champion, supporter, adviser, advocate and trainer for safety and health professionals working in
organisations of all sizes. We give the safety and health profession a consistent, independent, authoritative voice
at the highest levels.
Our single-minded focus is to support our members whose job is to protect the safety, health and wellbeing of
working people. We share their passion and determination to cut the number of people who die or fall ill because
of their work, by helping organisations to create safer, healthier and more sustainable working practices.
What IOSH do: Support, research, advice, training

We support our members in a variety of practical and effective ways. We offer online forums, networking events,
conferences, exhibitions and helplines to share information, advice, legal guidance and best practice.
We petition governments, advise policy-makers, commission research and set standards. We run high-profile
campaigns to promote awareness of the issues that affect safety, health and wellbeing at work – from the causes
of cancer to the hazards of dust, from safeguarding mental health to achieving a healthy work-life balance.
Our highly regarded training courses provide essential information, tools and skills for our members and their
colleagues, suppliers and customers. Our membership grades are linked to internationally recognised
qualifications, with Chartered Membership of IOSH acknowledged worldwide as the hallmark of professional
excellence in workplace safety and health.
Why IOSH do it: Safer, healthier workplaces

We empower our members to ensure that their organisations prioritise the safety, health and wellbeing of their
workforce. That’s good for people, but it’s also good for business – strengthening business reputations, resilience
and even results.
Our shared objective is a world where work is safe and healthy for every
working person, every day.
4
Introductions
• Meet the Trainer
EXERCISE
• Meet the Group
• Introduce yourself Introductions
What’s troubling you in the health and safety arena?
Meet the Trainer

Name
Meet the Group

Name
5
Course aims and objectives
INFORMATION
To provide an understanding of the moral, legal and business
case for proactive safety, health and risk management, strategic
safety and health management and its integration into holistic
business management systems and procedures.
Aims
The course aims to provide an understanding of the moral, legal and business case for proactive safety, health and
risk management, strategic safety and health management and its integration into holistic business management
systems and procedures.
Objectives
On successful completion of this course delegates will be able to:
• describe the moral, legal and financial role of operational directors, owners of small businesses and Senior
Executives, including their responsibilities, liabilities and accountabilities, both personal and organisational;
• explain the importance of safety and health at top-management level and how integrating those objectives
into other business management objectives can help to minimise risk, reduce losses and make better use of
time and resources;
• illustrate how to plan the direction for safety and health through developing and implementing a safety and
health policy, and integrating it into business systems;
• explain the value of an adequately resourced and efficient safety and health management system, the value
and benefits of training at all levels, and when to access competent advice;
• outline the benefits of good safety and health management systems, the consequences of failure to manage
effectively, and how to ensure internal controls are working;
• describe the importance of reviewing and continually improving management systems, especially following
change or failure;
• explain the positive impact and improvement that an organisation’s leaders can have on its performance
through their attitude and support for improving its safety culture;
• describe the importance of setting key performance indicators and targets, together with performance
monitoring and review for continual improvement in safety and health management.
6
Course programme
• Module 1 – The moral, financial and legal case Page 8
INFORMATION
Course programme
• Module 2 – Plan Page 74
• Module 3 – Do Page 96
• Module 4 – Check Page 116
• Module 5 – Act Page 129
• Self check Page 142
• Summary Page 148
Course programme
Module 1 – The moral, financial and legal case
Module 2 – Plan
Module 3 – Do
Module 4 – Check
Module 5 – Act
Self check
Summary
7
Module 1 - The moral, legal and financial case
There are three compelling reasons to manage health and safety
MODULE 1
• Moral The moral, legal and financial case
• Legal
• Financial
Module 1 - The moral, legal and financial case
There are three compelling reasons to manage health and & safety. They include:
Moral duty of care

As an employer and irrespective of the size of your business you have a responsibility to protect the people you
work with against physical, mental, emotional, and economic harm. This also extends applies to anyone that
comes into contact with your work. Duty of care is a matter of common law and you must take reasonable steps
to ensure safety in your workplace, and prevent any harm, injury or loss coming from any activity in your
organization. Your fundamental duty of care covers the following areas:
• Providing a safe place to work with safe access and egress
• Ensuring equipment is installed and used correctly
• Assessing risks and instigating measures to improve health and safety
• Provide information, instruction and training to your staff
• Developing safe systems of working that mitigate risk
• Providing adequate welfare facilities
We consider your moral obligation to ensure others are not caused harm by what you do or don’t do to be the
most compelling reason to manage health and safety. Quite simply the right thing to do.
Legal
Under health and safety law employers have an absolute duty to protect the health, safety and welfare of their
employees and other people who might be affected by their business and they must do whatever is ‘reasonably
practicable’ to achieve this. A failure to comply with the law can result in significant financial penalties in a
criminal court of law and in the most serious cases a custodial sentence when an individual is convicted. This can
be very damaging to your reputation. And in the civil courts claims may be brought against you where it is
believed that your negligence may have caused somebody to suffer injury or ill health.
Financial
Finally there is the financial consideration. They say if you think health and safety is expensive then try having an
accident. Whether measured in terms of Human costs such as the monetary estimate of the loss of quality of life,
and loss of life in the case of fatal injuries or Productivity costs including business disruption, the cost of
recruitment and work reorganisation it is likely that all sorts of costs will come spiralling out of a serious incident.
And most of these costs will not be covered by insurance.
8
Exercise – Motivators EXERCISE
Motivators
What motivates you?
Motivators
Questions to consider asking yourself:

(There is space below, to allow you to populate answers to the questions).
• As an Executive or Director, what would it mean to you and your family if a serious accident took place in your
organisation?
• What could happen to your reputation as an Executive or Director?
• How would you feel if you were to be interviewed under caution or had to stand in a court, being cross
examined?
• How do you think you would feel, living with the consequences of a fatal accident?
• Clearly this is not something any of us want to have on our conscious, so what ways do you think we could
constantly remind ourselves of this fact without becoming complacent.
9
Motivation
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
INFORMATION
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
10
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
In his 1943 paper “A theory of Human Motivation”, the American psychologist Abraham Maslow proposed a
theory which is commonly used to describe human needs.
Physiological Needs
Basic requirements
Air to breathe, water, food and sleep
When basic needs are met - then we are motivated by safety.
Safety Needs
Security - To have shelter – and protection from danger
To earn money and build resources
When feeling safe - then we look to be ‘Part of a group’
Social Needs
Need for love and belonging - Need to be close to family and friends
Belong to a society – Join a gang
When part of a group – need to stand out
Esteem Needs
Need to ‘be someone’ – need to be special
To have achievements – and recognition
When feeling special – then need for ‘self actualisation’
Self Actualisation
To relax – and be creative
Accept facts for what they are – and to ‘give back’
All previous needs have been met.
10
Module 1 – The moral reason
• Is it acceptable to cause pain and suffering?
MODULE 1
• Do we owe a duty of care to our employees?
• Do we have a moral responsibility as Directors? The moral reason
11
1. The Moral Reason
Morality
The concept of morality relates to our perception of what is right or wrong, just or unjust. Morality stems from
the Latin word moralis, which can mean manner, character or proper behaviour.
Ethics
Ethics is the systematic analysis of morality. Ethics is derived from the Greek word ethos, which can mean custom,
habit, character or disposition.
Clearly it would be immoral for employers to make profit at the cost of pain and suffering to their employees.
In spite of the best endeavours of the numerous interested parties, British businesses are still responsible for a
considerable number of workplace fatalities, serious injuries, and occupational diseases each year.
Is it acceptable to cause pain and suffering?
Do we owe a duty of care to our employees?
Do we have a moral responsibility as Directors and Leaders?
11
Exercise – “The numbers game”
QUIZ
“The numbers game”
Based on HSE’s most recent accident statistics please answer the
questions in your workbook
12
Based on UK Figures taken from latest HSE statistics estimate:
QUIZ – “The Numbers Game”
Total No of work-related fatal injuries
No of workers suffering from work-related ill health

(new or long-standing)
No of workers sustaining a non-fatal work-related

injury
No of workers suffering from work-related stress,

depression or anxiety
No of mesothelioma deaths due to past asbestos

exposures
No of workers suffering from COVID-19 believed to

have been through exposure at work
12
Fatal injury statistics
INFORMATION
Fatal Injury statistics
13
Fatal Injury statistics
Summary for 2020/21

The provisional figure for the number of workers fatally injured in 2020/21 is 142, and corresponds to a rate of
fatal injury of 0.61 deaths per 100,000 workers.
The figure of 142 worker deaths in 2020/21 is 40% higher than the previous year which is a major cause for
concern.
Over the latest 20-year time period there has been a downward trend in the rate of fatal injury, although in recent
years this shows signs of levelling off.
There were 60 members of the public fatally injured in accidents connected to work in 2020/21 (excluding
incidents relating to railways, and those enforced by the Care Quality Commission (CQC)).
Fatal injuries are subject to chance variation, fluctuating year-on-year, therefore it is necessary to look at trends
over a number of years.
Number of fatal injuries to workers in Great Britain from 1974 to 2021
Source HSE
13
Non-Fatal injury statistics
INFORMATION
Reported non-fatal injuries
14
Reported non-fatal injuries

Sources
There are two main sources of non-fatal injury statistics: estimates from self-reports obtained through the annual
Labour Force Survey (LFS); and incidents reported by employers under the RIDDOR. When analysing trends,
statistics from the LFS have several advantages over RIDDOR: they are not subject to substantial under reporting;
they are not affected by changes in legislation and data is available for all workplace injuries, irrespective of time
off work.
Data
Date from both sources shows:
• In 2020/21 around half as many workers were fatally injured compared to 20 years ago. For the latest year 142
workers died, with a fatal injury rate of 0.61 deaths per 100,000 workers (RIDDOR).
• Rates of self-reported non-fatal injury at work have generally followed a downward trend over the last ten
years or so (LFS). In recent years, however, they show signs of levelling off. In 2020/21 an estimated 441,000
workers sustained a non-fatal injury at work. Of these injuries:
• 339,000 led to up to 7 days absence from work; and
• 102,000 led to over 7 days absence.
• There were 51,211 non-fatal injuries to employees reported by employers in 2020/21.
• There are signs that the downward trend for RIDDOR-reported non-fatal injuries may also be slowing-down,
although analysis is complicated by the recent changes in the reporting requirements. See Effect on RIDDOR
statistics following recent legal and system changes for information about the recent changes in the reporting
requirements and their impact on the statistics.
• Under the old RIDDOR reporting requirement (‘major’ and over-3-day), self-reported results suggested that
just over half of all non-fatal injuries to employees were actually reported. The self-employed reported a much
smaller proportion.
• Under the new RIDDOR reporting requirement (‘specified’ and over-7-day), early indications suggest reporting
levels of non-fatal injuries to employees have fallen below half.
Enforcement
Latest figures for 2020/21 show:
• HSE prosecuted 185 cases, with at least one conviction secured.
• 2,929 notices were issued by HSE and local authorities
• Total fines of £26.9m were imposed
• Average fine per case was £145,000
14
Work related ill health figures
INFORMATION
Work related ill health figures
15
Latest figures from HSE (for the reporting years 2020/21)
Data
An estimated 1.7 million workers were suffering from a work-related illness (new or long standing).
An estimated 470,000 workers suffering from work-related musculoskeletal disorders (new or longstanding).
An estimated 800,000 workers suffering from work-related stress, depression or anxiety (new or longstanding).
2,595 mesothelioma deaths in 2016 with a similar number of lung cancer deaths linked to past exposures to
asbestos.
32.5 million working days lost due to work-related injury and ill health (2019/20).
£16.2 billion annual costs of work-related injury and new cases of illness, excluding long latency illness such as
cancer (2018/19).
15
Living with the consequences
• Breaking the news to a loved one
INFORMATION
• Living with the consciousness of a fatality
• Psychological effect (regret) Living with the consequences
• The importance of reporting the impact of any
– Changes
– Weaknesses; or
– Failures in the system
16
Living with the consequences
Breaking the news to a loved one

Should a fatality occur within your organisation, then someone is likely to be the one who has to inform the family
that their loved one is not coming home tonight. When a loved one finds out their husband/wife, father/mother,
son/daughter is not returning, the emotional distress this can place on all involved can replay on a persons mind,
many years later. As we have seen in the earlier case study, this can be a devastating experience for all involved
and can provoke emotions such as anger.
Living with the consciousness of a fatality

In terms of the long term affect that a fatality can have on a person, this can be a short term or long term effect
dependent on a number of variables. This is similar to military personnel who suffer with Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder (PTSD) from their time involved in conflicts around the world. Counselling should be offered to those
involved, but even so, this may take many sessions to come to terms with what they have witnessed.
Psychological effect (regret)

Should anyone witness a fatality occur in their presence, then it is highly likely to have a long term effect on that
persons health and well-being. This can change a person’s mood, they may not be able to handle what has
occurred, it could seep into their own personal life and they may struggle to sleep at nights. A person may suffer
for a long time with regret of whether they could have responded differently, or attempted to prevent the fatality
occurring.
The importance of reporting the impact of any

• Changes
• Weaknesses; or
• Failures in the system
So that the appropriate remedial action can be taken before something undesirable occurs.
16
Module 1 – The legal reason
• Is it acceptable to break the law?
INFORMATION
• What laws effect Health and Safety?
• What happens if we break the Law? Module 1 – The legal reason
17
The legal reason
The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974

This is the primary piece of legislation in the UK covering health and safety in the workplace. This piece of
legislation lays out the employer’s responsibilities for health and safety. Employers have a ‘duty of care’ over the
health, safety and welfare of their staff in the workplace.
The Act specifies the duties that employers have to their staff, to customers and members of the public whilst in
the working environment. The Act also states that employees have their own responsibility for keeping
themselves and others safe, for example they must follow the guidance in the health and safety training they are
provided.
However, health and safety legislation limits an employer’s responsibility to what is ‘reasonably practical’.
Therefore if the measures required to protect staff and the general public are technically impossible, or the cost of
the measures is grossly disproportionate to the risk, then the employer does not have to implement them.
Health and safety law requires management to use its common sense in looking at what the risks are and
identifying what could be done to tackle them. In 1999 the responsibilities of management were clarified in The
Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations.
A risk assessment is the main requirement of employers, and those with five or more staff have to record the
findings. The risk assessment required by law should be very straightforward in a typical office environment. It
does, however, become a more complicated affair where there are serious hazards present which threaten the
health and safety of employers, such as those on an oil rig, a chemical plant or a nuclear power station.
17
Exercise - Accountability
Case study – Office Fire - Who is to blame?
EXERCISE
• Employee
• Visitor Accountability
• Manager
• Director / Senior Manager
• Organisation
18
Background
A serious fire broke out in an office injuring an employee and visitor. The office belongs to a larger organisation
that has a number of offices throughout the UK.
The facts of the case are:

The fire started as a result of a faulty / damaged heater
The fire spread to the stairway as the fire door was wedged open
The injured parties (employee and visitor) were injured when trying to evacuate from the 1st floor
The smoke entered the stairwell which was the means of escape but had not triggered the smoke detector
On investigation:
There was a fire risk assessment in place which had been done by the manager
The manager or employee had received no fire safety training by the company
The door was wedged open to allow the heater to warm the building
The heater whilst an obvious fault was not detected by anyone
The fire alarm system had not been serviced as the contract had been cancelled by the company on grounds of
cost
Using the information above identify possible failings by:

The Employee
The Manager
The Director / Senior Manager
The Organisation
18
The two divisions of the law
• Civil Law: Aims to make restitution.
INFORMATION
 Derived from Common law and deals with the private
rights of individuals and groups who decide whether to
take action with regards a wrong done to them.
• Criminal Law: Aims to punish.
 Deals with wrongs against society and is enforced by a
regulator typically Police, Local Authority, HSE, Fire
Authority, Environment Agency.
19
Civil Law
This deals with the private right of action used primarily to place a person in the position they would have been in
had the tort (wrong-doing) not occurred. The aim in claims following accidents is to compensate the victim for
actual loses suffered. This section outlines the law as applied to decisions on compensation for death, injuries, ill
health, or damage. There may be health and safety issues involved in Contract Law, however this is not an area
that is generally used for health and safety matters and therefore is not covered in this section.
An injured or disabled employee or the dependants of an employee who has suffered a loss from an accident or
illness may seek to obtain compensation through the Civil System by suing the employer.
Criminal Law
The other type of law is criminal law the purpose of which is to deal with wrongs against society and to punish
accordingly. Criminal law is enforced by a regulator i.e. Police, Local Authority, HSE, Fire Authority, Environment
Agency. Strict procedures apply when considering whether to prosecute an offender. Decisions are also made on
the ‘Evidential’ test and whether it is in the ‘Public interest’. Inspectors from The Health and Safety Executive and
Environmental Health Officers from the Local Authority are responsible for enforcing health and safety legislation
in the workplace in the UK.
19
Civil and Criminal Law
Civil Law Criminal Law
INFORMATION
Torts
Offences against Individual
Mainly Common Law
Crimes
Offences against society
Mainly Statute Law
Civil and criminal law
Intended result: Compensation Intended result: Punishment
Insurance can be obtained and must Insurance for legal fees only. No
be obtained for employees insurance for ‘punishment’
Loss required No loss required
Standard of proof: Standard of proof:
Balance of probabilities Guilty beyond all reasonable doubt
County or High Court Magistrates or Crown Court
20
Civil and criminal law
Law
Law can be defined simply as a body of rules that aims to regulate the behaviour of society.
The most important distinction from the health and safety aspect is in the way that law is applied or administered.
This falls into two systems – Civil and Criminal. The difference between these two systems is not the event or
circumstances that give rise to the legal action, but the purpose for which the legal process is initiated a “crime”
may also be a “civil wrong” (or “tort”):
If an individual or organisation is convicted of an offence in a criminal court, this is often sufficient for a civil court
to later find that individual or organisation liable for damages that resulted from that offence. If for example an
employee injured his/her hand when using an inadequately guarded machine, the HSE might prosecute the
employer for failing to adequately guard the machine. In such circumstances, the civil court would consider this
prosecution.
The Distinct Features Of Civil And Criminal Law Systems

Civil Branch Criminal Branch
“Tort”. “Crime”.
Offence against an individual. Offence against society.
Mainly derived from Common Law (basic Mainly involves Statute Law (written laws i.e.
unwritten duties and precedents interpreted by Acts and Regulations).
judges).
Action brought by an individual. Action brought by the State.

Intended result is compensation. Intended result is punishment.
Insurance can be obtained. Punishment cannot be insured against.

No action is possible unless there has been a loss. Action can be taken regardless of whether or not
there was loss.
The defendant has to be proved liable on balance The accused is innocent until proved guilty
of probability. beyond reasonable doubt.
Heard in County or High Court. Heard in Magistrates or Crown Court.

Since the level of proof is different, it is not unusual for an individual to be acquitted (or perhaps not even
charged) under criminal law yet be found liable in the civil court.
20
Civil Law
• Liability
INFORMATION
•
•
The tort of negligence
On the balance of probabilities Civil, law
• Time limit
21
Civil Law
Liability
Under civil law, if someone has been injured or made ill through your negligence as an employer, they may be able
to make a compensation claim against you. You can also be found liable if someone who works for you has been
negligent and caused harm to someone else.
The Tort of Negligence

Negligence is a failure to exercise appropriate and/or ethical ruled care expected to be exercised amongst
specified circumstances. The area of tort law known as negligence involves harm caused by failing to act as a form
of carelessness possibly with extenuating circumstances. Or of you prefer the most usual definition of negligence
is that it is conduct, or a failure to act, that breaches a duty to take care.
If an employee suffers an injury as a result of an accident in the workplace that could have been avoided, s/he
estimate can file a compensation claim against the employer. All employers in the UK under the law have a duty of
care to keep employees safe from harm and injury in the workplace
On the balance of probabilities

The balance of probability standard means that a court is satisfied an event occurred if the court considers that,
on the evidence, the occurrence of the event was more likely than not.
Time limit
The employee must prove the employer was negligent and in general they have a time limit of up to 3 years from
the date of the health and safety breach injury to make an injury claim (known as the claim limitation date made
by the Limitation Act 1980) after which your injury claim becomes 'statute barred'.
21
Bringing a civil claim
• Duty – was it foreseeable
INFORMATION
•
•
Breach - reasonably prudent person
Causation Bringing a claim
• Damages
22
Bringing a claim
Proof
In order to win a negligence case, the claimant (the person injured) must prove the following four elements to
show that the defendant (the employer) acted negligently. To successfully sue the employer for damages for
personal injury arising from an accident at work, it would be necessary to prove for the claimant to prove his/her
case, on balance of probability that:
The defendant owed him a duty of care

When assessing a negligence claim, the first step is to look to see whether or not the defendant owed the claimant
a legal duty of care. It can sometimes be difficult to know whether a duty of care was owed however in the case of
an employer/employee relationship (master/servant) the duty would be quickly established as the test is, was it
foreseeable that the injured person could be injured, and, is it fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty?
Employers always have a duty of care to their employees.
The defendant breached that duty

Next, the court will look to see whether the defendant breached this duty by doing (or not doing something) that
a "reasonably prudent person" would do under similar circumstances. The term "reasonably prudent person"
refers to a legal standard that represents how the average person would responsibly act in a certain situation.
Stated simply, the defendant likely will be found negligent if the average person, knowing what the defendant
knew at the time, would have known that someone might have been injured as a result of his or her actions -- and
would have acted differently than the defendant did in that situation.(i.e. was negligent - failed to act in the way
that a reasonable person would act).
The breach caused his injury

Next the claimant must show that the defendant's negligence actually caused his or her injury. It is important that
this link is established – negligence must cause the injury. As part of determining this it is also important to decide
whether the defendant could reasonably have foreseen that his or her actions might cause an injury. If the
defendant's actions somehow caused the claimant injury through a random, unexpected act of nature, the injury
would most likely be deemed unforeseeable -- and the defendant will not likely be found liable.
The employer must take positive steps to ensure the safety of his employees in the light of the knowledge, which
he has, or ought to have. The employer is entitled to follow current recognised practice unless in the light of
common sense or new knowledge this is clearly unsound. Where there is developing knowledge, the employer
must keep reasonably abreast with it, and not be too slow in applying it. If he has greater than average knowledge
of the risk, he must take more than average precautions.
He must weigh up the risk (in terms of the likelihood of the injury and possible consequences) against the
effectiveness of the precautions to be taken to meet the risk, and the cost and inconvenience.
We also need to establish what elements make up the duty of care. Cases (notably Wilson & Clyde Coal Co. Ltd. v
English, 1938) have defined the duty of care of an employer as including the following:
A safe place of work and a safe access to and egress from the place of work.
• A safe system of work.
• Safe plant and equipment.
• Safe and competent fellow workers.
22
Vicarious liability
INFORMATION
Vicarious liability
23
Vicarious Liability
Vicarious Liability
Vicarious liability is a legal doctrine that assigns liability for an injury to a person who did not cause the injury but
who has a particular legal relationship to the person who did act negligently. The employer is charged with legal
responsibility for the negligence of the employee because the employee is held to be an agent of the employer. If
a negligent act is committed by an employee acting within the general scope of her or his employment, the
employer will be held liable for damages. In Century Insurance Co Ltd v Northern Ireland Transport Board 1942 a
tanker driver lit a cigarette and threw away a match whilst delivering petrol resulting in an explosion. The
employer was found to be liable for the drivers actions.
23
Case Studies
• Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]
CASE STUDIES
• British Railways Board v Herrington [1972
• Paris v Stepney Borough Council [1951]
24
Case studies
In Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562, HL
Mrs. Donoghue suffered injury when she drank the contents of a bottle of ginger beer purchased by a friend
which, to her horror, contained a decomposed snail. The bottle was made of dark opaque glass and Mrs.
Donoghue had no reason to suspect that it contained anything but pure ginger beer. Mrs. Donoghue was
subsequently ill and tried to sue the manufacturer for breach of contract but was unable to because her friend
had purchased the ginger beer.
The House of Lords decided that the manufacturer was liable. Lord Atkin stated as follows: “You must take
reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your
neighbour. Who, then, in law is my neighbour? The answer seems to be – persons who are so closely and directly
affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing
my mind to the acts or omissions which are called in question.”
Donoghue v Stevenson is the origin of the modern common law of negligence. It forms the basis of all the current
rules relating to employer’s liability at common law for failure to take reasonable care to ensure the health and
safety of employees and others not in their employment.
British Railways Board v Herrington [1972] 1 All ER 749

While an occupier does not owe the same duty of care to a trespasser which he owes to a visitor, he owes a
trespasser a duty to take such steps as common sense or common humanity would dictate, to exclude or warn or
otherwise, within reasonable and practicable limits, reduce or avert a danger.
An electrified railway line owned by the British Railways Board ran through National Trust property, which was
open to the public. The fences on each side were in poor condition and in April 1965 children had been seen on
the line. A particular part of the fence had clearly been used as a route to cross the railway.
In June 1965 P, aged six, was injured when he stepped onto the line having got through the broken part of the
fence. He claimed damages for negligence, and the judge at first instance held that since the emergence of a child
from the surrounding land onto the line was reasonably foreseeable, by allowing the fence to fall into and remain
in substantial disrepair, the defendants were guilty of negligence. The Court of Appeal further held that the
defendants acted in reckless disregard for the plaintiff’s safety and were in breach of their duty.
This case was a key decision regarding property owners’ duty of care towards trespassers. It paved the way for the
Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 which created a duty of common humanity towards trespassers.
Paris v Stepney Borough Council [1951] 1 All ER 42, HL

Mr Paris worked in the Borough Council’s trucks maintenance garage. He had been blinded in one eye during the
Second World War but had successfully managed to conceal this from his employers until he was examined by a
doctor for the purposes of the council’s superannuation scheme.
When it came to light that he was blind in one eye he was given two weeks’ notice of dismissal. Two days before
he was due to leave he was working underneath one of the council’s gulley cleaning trucks. He was using a
hammer to loosen a “U” bolt on the truck’s rear springs when a piece of metal flew off into his good eye, blinding
him. He claimed damages for negligence saying that he, as an individual with extra susceptibility of serious injury,
should have been provided with goggles.
The House of Lords upheld his claim. The duty to take reasonable steps by an employer for preventing injury to
employees is owed to each employee individually. If an employer knows of a condition in an employee which
makes that employee more susceptible to injury, or makes the consequences of injury more severe than usual, he
must take extra precautions. In this case, the provision of goggles to Mr Paris would have been reasonable even if
no goggles were provided to other men doing the same kind of work.
This case concluded that there is a common law duty of care by employers towards workers with ‘extra
susceptibility’ of serious injury which, in these days of ambulance chasing no-win-no-fee claims companies,
continues to remain especially relevant.
24
Contesting a personal injury claim
•
•
Dispute
Challenge causation
INFORMATION
•
•
No duty
Fraudulent claim Contesting a personal injury claim
• Extent of injury
• Illegality
• Contributory negligence
• Volenti non fit injuria
25
Contesting a personal injury claim
Dispute the facts

The employer, as a defendant may dispute any of these facts, ranging from how the accident occurred to proving
that the injuries and financial losses were not a direct result of the accident. The defendant may be may be able
to produce CCTV or maintenance records to evidence that there were no hazards in the area and as such were not
negligent in their actions. Often a company's health and safety policies, procedures and training can be produced
when defending a claim that has occurred at work. So ensuring these records are documented and up to date can
be a key evidence in a defence.
Causation
Even if a defendant admits liability they are still able to dispute what is referred to as 'causation' and argue that
not all of the injuries and losses suffered by the claimant were caused by the defendant's negligence. A claimant
must provide evidence to prove that the injuries and losses they are claiming have arisen solely
as a result of the defendant's negligence and therefore the defendant should be paying compensation for them.
For example, if a claimant has suffered a back injury but also has a pre-accident history of back pain, then they will
need to provide medical evidence to support that the accident was the cause.
No duty of care exists

Employers must ensure employees can conduct their work safely but the same may not be true for two self-
employed contractors.
Alleging fraud
The employer may believe the claimant is acting fraudulently or even that the accident occurred at all. If evidence
supports this allegation then not only can a case be dismissed, but the claimant may find themselves prosecuted
and found 'fundamentally dishonest' forcing them to pay a defendant's legal costs.
Extent of injury
It may be accepted that there was an injury which was caused by the accident however the defendant may be
able to obtain expert evidence to show the claimant is exaggerating their symptoms and losses.
Illegality
The defence of illegality denies recovery to certain claimants injured while committing illegal activities.
Contributory negligence
While not a complete defence, contributory negligence is where the injured person is in some way at fault for the
accident or incident which caused their injuries. So, while the defendant was partially to blame, so was the
claimant. If contributory negligence can be proved, against the claimant or another involved party it can have a
dramatic effect on the final compensation amount awarded.
Volenti non fit injuria

Sometimes called voluntary assumption of risk
Over 18% of all personal injury settlements are from injuries sustained at a workplace or in public.
2019/20 Compensation Recovery Unit Data
25
Assessment of damages
• Employers’ Liability (EL) insurance
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Compensatory function of damages in tort
How much?
– General damages
– Special damages
26
Employers’ Liability (EL) insurance

Under the Employers’ Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969 employers must have Employers’ Liability (EL)
insurance from an authorised insurer for at least £5million. When a claim for a workplace injury is successful the
compensation would be paid from the employers’ liability insurance.
Compensatory function of damages in tort

Damages in tort are in general compensatory, i.e. they aim (subject to the rules of remoteness and mitigation) to
make the claimant whole—i.e. to put the claimant in the position they would have been in had the tort not been
committed—but no more than that.
What is assessment of damages?

The general object of an award of damages is to compensate the plaintiff for the losses, pecuniary and non-
pecuniary, sustained as a result of the defendant's tort. More specifically, the assessment process is said to aim at
restitutio in integrum
How Much Compensation For An Injury At Work?

The amount of compensation that a claimant will receive after suffering an accident at work injury will be unique
to the claim and the particular circumstances surrounding the accident and will be made up of General damages
and Special damages.
General damages
The compensation payment will firstly depend on the severity and duration of the injuries. This is typically known
as General Damages. The Judicial College guidelines award compensation up to £214,350 for serious brain injury,
whilst a mild finger injury may be limited to £375. This type of compensation generally covers the "pain and
suffering" that you’re assumed to have endured.
Special damages
If the accident at work and subsequent injury has a lasting effect on the way the individual lives day-to-day then
there may be entitlement to a larger amount of compensation. These are typically known as Special Damages and
may include, but aren’t limited to:
 Medical expenses
 Loss of earnings
 Care and assistance claims (e.g. if you hired a carer or your partner/spouse assisted during your recovery)
 Travel expenses to appointments
 Damages to your belongings i.e. a smashed phone screen
 Loss of pension
When an accident at work results in life-changing injuries, the amount of compensation you may receive could
also include money for any adjustments to be made to your home.
26
Civil procedure rules
• Civil procedure
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Process
Letter of claim
Acknowledgement
Civil procedure rules
• Disclosure
27
Civil Procedure Rules

Civil Procedure
New rules were put in place in 1999 following Lord Woolf’s enquiry into the reasons why the legal system for
dealing with claims was slow and unfair. The new rules made it clear that litigation should be a last resort and
introduced a number of “pre-action protocols” to provide for the early exchange of information. Parties who fail
to comply with the protocols can be penalised by the courts.
Summary of process
A summary of the intended sequence of events is:
 letter of claim sent and received

 defendant must reply (at least acknowledge) within 21 days
 claim investigated
 admit liability and settle out of court
 deny liability either completely or partially
 relevant documentation disclosed
 a “statement of truth” must be signed by someone from the defendant’s organisation.
Letter of claim
The claimant must immediately send the “proposed” defendant a letter with sufficient information (if available) to
substantiate a realistic claim. The letter of claim includes a summary of the facts, nature of injuries and details of
any financial loss. Sufficient information should be given to allow the defendant’s insurer/solicitor to carry out an
investigation.
Acknowledgement
The defendant has 21 days to acknowledge receipt of the letter of claim and a further 3 months from the date of
acknowledgement to investigate the claim before making a formal reply to the letter of claim. Where liability is
denied or the defendant alleges contributory negligence then the defendant must provide reasons and relevant
documentation. The claimant must respond to allegations of contributory negligence before issuing proceedings.
Information that defendants must disclose
The protocols set out in some detail specific information that defendants must disclose. For workplace injury
claims, this includes:
 accident book entries
 first-aid reports
 foreman/supervisor’s report.
Where specific regulations apply, the protocols require additional documents to be produced. For example, in
respect of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 the following should be disclosed:
 pre-accident risk assessment required by Regulation 3
 post-accident risk assessment required by Regulation 3
 accident investigation report
 health surveillance records required by Regulation 6.
27
Court procedures
• Small Claims Track
INFORMATION
• Fast Track
• Multi Track Court procedures
28
Court procedures
Always in court?
Most claims made with an injury solicitor are settled without having to go to court but if it does need to go to
court – for example, if the other party refuses to accept responsibility for the injury – then your case will still need
to be assigned to one of these ‘tracks’ in preparation for a hearing. The defendant then has 14 days to file the
defence with Court.
‘Tracks’ are formal court procedures that allow personal injury claims to be dealt with efficiently and cost-
effectively. Simply put, this means that if the claim goes to court, then it can be handled in the most suitable way.
The track the case is allocated to depends on the value of the claim and how long a trial might take. There are
three routes called tracks (small-claims track, fast track, and multi-track).
Small-claims track
A small claim is a claim that is £10,000 or less, or if the claim concerns a personal injury, then the maximum is
£1,000. This is generally for lower value and less complicated claims.
Fast- track
This is for claims with a value of between £10,000 and £25,000. The fast track is for straightforward claims with
lower value and can usually be dealt with in a one-day trial. This track is the ‘norm’ for most cases, and a final
hearing usually takes place within 30 weeks. It’s possible for a claim to be re-allocated from fast track to multi-
track. For example, if the case becomes more complicated than expected
Multi-track
Usually, cases that aren’t suitable for the fast track will be allocated to the multi-track. Early on, the court will
hold a ‘case management conference’ (CMC). This is an informal meeting where everyone involved in the case,
including the judge, meets to talk about the progress of the case and decide how to move forward. There’s no
standard procedure for how cases go through the multi-track. The timetable can vary from case to case,
depending on the type of claim, and how complex it becomes. Multi-track cases usually take longer than fast
track, with the final trial often taking a number of days.
Once it has been decided to go ahead with a claim, the solicitor will get the ball rolling by sending a ‘Claim Form’
and ‘Particulars of Claim’ to the court. These documents give the details of the claim and its value.
28
Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
Act 2013 INFORMATION
• Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013
• civil liability unless expressly excluded
Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
• Must rely on actions for common law negligence.
Act 2013
29
Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013

Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013
Section 69 of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act came into force on 1 October 2013. It amends s.47 of the
Health and Safety at Work, etc Act 1974 (HSWA). Under s.47 of HSWA, there was a legal presumption that all
health and safety regulations involved civil liability unless expressly excluded.
The 2013 Act reverses this presumption. No regulations will impose civil liability unless there is express provision
to that effect. There will be no civil enforcement for breach of health and safety regulations. Employees will have
to rely on actions for common law negligence.
This means that the burden of proof, instead of being on the employer to show what steps were taken to protect
an employee, shifts to the employee to prove negligence.
The enforcement of health and safety regulations will now be left to the HSE through the criminal courts.
It has been commented that before the 2013 Act was introduced, employees needed only to show that a machine
was inadequate or defective. Now they have to prove that an employer could and should have spotted the defect
before the incident, and rectified it.
Case study
In May 2019, a driver and porter employed by T Bourne and Son, a removal company, recovered £28,500
compensation from his employer. He had been helping to move a machine which weighed 3250kg when it fell
onto his hand. The employer had carried out a superficial risk assessment and was found to have been negligent. It
was vicariously liable. The claimant could not rely on a direct breach of the Manual Handling Operations
Regulations 1992 because of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013, but it was relevant to consider the
1992 Regulations in considering the scope and standard of care of duty owed. There was no contributory
negligence. The claimant had been placed in a very difficult position and had been fearful of losing his job if he did
not continue.
29
Role of employment tribunals
• Formerly known as Industrial Tribunals
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Settlement of employers and workers disputes
Prohibition/Improvement notice appeals
Safety representatives time off applications
The role of Employment Tribunals
30
The role of Employment Tribunals

Formerly known as Industrial Tribunals and created in 1964 Employment tribunals hear cases where a dispute has
arisen in the workplace between employee and employer and it cannot be resolved internally. They are less
formal than other kinds of court procedures but evidence is given on oath and you can be prosecuted for perjury if
you lie.
Settlement
Their purpose is to provide an easily accessible, speedy, informal and inexpensive procedure for the settlement of
disputes between employers and workers”.
The Tribunals are arranged on a regional basis and each will comprise: an independent Chairman (legally qualified
and appointed from a panel drawn up by the Lord Chancellor) and two lay members one appointed from a panel
representing employers, and the other representing the workers. They have a wide range of jurisdictions and
their key roles in respect of health and safety are:
Prohibition or Improvement Notices

To hear appeals against Prohibition or Improvement Notices. When a Notice is issued, there is a period of 21 days
in which an appeal can be made. An Improvement Notice is suspended until the appeal is heard, however a
Prohibition Notice remains in force.
Safety Representatives
To hear applications from Safety Representatives about time off with pay for training and from Safety
Representatives and others who claim to have suffered “detriment” (loss of pay or status etc) by their employers
as a consequence of carrying out their health and safety duties.
The appeal lies on a point of law only against the decision of the Employment Tribunal. Depending on the
jurisdiction being exercised it may be to the Employment Appeals Tribunal, but for health and safety issues it is to
the Divisional Court of the Queens Bench Division of the High Court.
30
Criminal Law
• Framework
INFORMATION
•
•
Duties
Guidance Criminal law
• Enforcement
• Penalties
31
Coming up
Framework
Duties
Guidance
Enforcement
Penalties
31
Criminal legislation framework
Approved
INFORMATION
The criminal legislation framework
Guidance
Acts Regulations Codes of
Practice
Management of Health
and Safety at Work Managing for Health
Approved Code of and Safety HSG 65
Management of Health Practice L21
and Safety at Work
Regulations
Health and Safety at
Other Examples
Work etc. Act
Other Examples
32
The criminal legislation framework

The Health and Safety Commission and its operating arm, the Executive (HSC/E),have spent over twenty years
modernising the structure of health and safety law. Their aims are to protect the health, safety and
welfare of employees, and to safeguard others, principally the public, who may be exposed to risks from
from work activity.
Acts
The basis of British health and safety law is the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.The Act sets out the gener
al duties which employers have towards employees and members of the public and employees have
to themselves and to each other. The Act is “goal setting” legislation, i.e. employers have duties to control
risks adequately but have considerable freedom about how they do so. Some risks are so great that it is
considered appropriate to use Regulations to make the requirements to control more explicit.
Regulations
HASAWA is an as “Enabling Act” which is overarching. It gives powers to a Minister of the Government to create
further legislation within the subject matter of the Act. Regulations are particularly suited for detailed technical
matters and where it is necessary to make more explicit what employers are required to do. Regulations can be
introduced or adapted quickly as they bypass the full parliamentary process. Most health and safety regulations
have been prompted by EU Directives but of course the UK has now left the EU!
Approved Codes of Practice

Approved Codes of Practice offer practical examples of good practice. They give advice on how to comply with the
law by, for example, providing a guide to what is ‘reasonably practicable’. For example, if regulations
use words like ‘suitable and sufficient’, an Approved Code of Practice can illustrate what this
requires in particular circumstances. Approved Codes of Practice have a special legal status. If employers are
prosecuted for a breach of health and safety law, and it is proved that they have not followed the relevant
provisions of the Approved Code of Practice, a court can find them at fault unless they can show that they
have complied with the law in some other way. There are not many Regulations supported by ACoP’s and in some
cases the regulations are considered to be sufficiently explicit.
Guidance
HSE publishes guidance on a range of subjects. Guidance can be specific to the health and safety
problems of an industry or of a particular process used in a number of industries.
The main purposes of guidance are:
• to interpret - helping people to understand what the law says including for
example how requirements based on EC Directives fit with those under the Health and Safety at Work Act
• to help people comply with the law;
• to give technical advice.
Following guidance is not compulsory and employers are free to take other action But if you do follow guidance
you will normally be doing enough to comply with the law.
32
EXERCISE - Legislation
What other Acts, Regulations, Approved Codes of Practice and
EXERCISE
Legislation
Guidance are directly relating or impacting on Health and Safety
within your company?
• Acts
• Regulations
• Approved Codes of Practice
• Guidance
here
33
EXERCISE – Legislation
What other Acts, Regulations, ACoP’s and Guidance are directly relating or impacting on
Health and Safety within your company?
Acts
Example: HASAWA
Regulations
Management Regulations
Approved Codes of Practice

Management Regulations ACOP
Guidance
Managing for Health and Safety - HSE HSG 65
33
The impact of Brexit
• Exiting the European Union
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Some changes
We now make our own law
The duty is still the same
34
Exiting the European Union

Up until January 2020 much of Britain’s health and safety law originated in Europe with
proposals from the European Commission agreed by Member States, who were
then responsible for making them part of their domestic law.
Modern health and safety law in this country, including much of that from Europe,
is based on the principle of risk assessment described above. Directives indicate the required results
to be achieved but leave the detail to the individual member states; they only take effect when they are embodied
in the national legislation. Member states are given a transposition deadline by which date they must introduce
their own legislation.
Most health and safety legislation has remained exactly the same. All organisations must continue to operate with
their duty of care. To reduce risk and protect people’s health and safety just as they did before we left the EU.
UK health and safety regulations are underpinned by the HSAWA. The Act remains in place. The requirement to
carry out a risk assessment on all work operations has not changed with the UK leaving the EU. Managing health
and safety is still a UK legal requirement regardless of any trade deal or transition period.
Transition
All EU law has been copied exactly as it was at 10.59pm on 31 December 2020 and adopted into our own laws.
The laws have been amended so that they make sense in that they refer to Great Britain not the EU. However
these laws will only have limited application in Northern Ireland. In accordance with the Protocol on
Ireland/Northern Ireland, and Northern Ireland will continue to comply with EU law. Any retained legislation has
been adopted into domestic law exactly how it stood in the EU at the moment we left. This includes all
amendments made to the legislation up until that point. Any amendments the EU published after 11pm on 31
December 2020 do not apply to retained law. As of now, the UK government is responsible for retained law and
can apply any amendments to it as it sees fit.
Gong forward
There are also the UK's own domestic laws to consider, that have been made to implement EU Directives. Most of
these laws contained references to the EU and relied on EU regulatory bodies. As the UK is not part of the EU
anymore, this legislation would have been ineffective due to these references. As a result, large amounts of
domestic law, including the newly retained law (which was essentially cut and pasted from the EU) also had to be
amended to remove references to the EU and to fix deficiencies.
These amendments take the form of EX Exit Regulations. So far, the UK government has published more than 600
of them, making around 80,000 changes to legislation such as the Personal Protective Equipment at Work
Regulations 1992 and Working Time Regulations 1998, which originated from the EU.
At the time of writing it is not envisaged that there will be any relaxation in the duties imposed on employers
and employees by health and safety legislation in the UK.
34
Employers duties to employees
Section 2
INFORMATION
Every employer shall ensure, so far as reasonably practicable,
the health, safety & welfare at work of all its employees. Employers duties to employees
35
General Duties of Employers to their Employees
Section 2 - General Duties of Employers to their Employees

1) It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety, and
welfare at work of all his employees.
2) Without prejudice to the generality of an employer's duty under the preceding subsection, the matters to
which the duty extends include in particular;
• The provision and maintenance of plant and systems of work that are, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe
and without risks to health;
• Arrangements for ensuring, so far as is reasonably practicable, safety and absence of risks to health in
connection with the use, handling, storage and transport of articles and substances;
• The provision of such information, instruction, training and supervision as is necessary to ensure, so far as is
reasonably practicable, the health and safety at work of his employees;
• So far as is reasonably practicable as regards any place of work under the employer's control, the maintenance
of it in a condition that is safe and without risks to health and the provision and maintenance of means of
access to and egress from it that are safe and without such risks;
• The provision and maintenance of a working environment for his employees that is, so far as is reasonably
practicable, safe, without risks to health, and adequate as regards facilities and arrangements for their welfare
at work.
Examples of how the general duties are made more explicit by regulations
The provision of information (under section 2c) is to ensure the health and safety of employees; therefore it may
be necessary for the employer to provide information, instruction, training and supervision to others e.g. a
contractor, if this is necessary to protect employees - see R v Swan Hunter Shipbuilders Ltd and Telemeter
Installations Ltd [1981]
Regulation 10 of the Management Regulations defines further specific information for employees and Regulation
13 specifies the employer’s duty to assess capabilities and provide adequate training at induction and were
circumstances in the employee's role or type of work have changed.
35
Employers duties to non employees
Section 3
INFORMATION
It shall be the duty of every employer to conduct his undertaking
in such a way as to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable,
that persons not in his employment who may be affected
Employers duties to non employees
thereby are not thereby exposed to risks to their health or
safety.
36
General Duties of Employers to Persons other their Employees
Section 3 - General Duties of Employers to Persons other their Employees

1) It shall be the duty of every employer to conduct his undertaking in such a way as to ensure, so far as is
reasonably practicable, that persons not in his employment who may be affected thereby are not thereby exposed
to risks to their health or safety.
2) It shall be the duty of every self-employed person to conduct his undertaking in such a way as to ensure, so far
as is reasonably practicable, that he and other persons (not being his employees) who may be affected are not
thereby exposed to risks to their health or safety.
An employer, (or self-employed person) must "conduct his undertaking", that is carry out his work; in such a way
that it does not affect the health and safety of others such as employees of other employers or members of the
public.
This will cover such as designers of something that others have to build, employers who take on contractors and
contractors who carry out work on public roads etc. Regulations 11 & 12 of the Management Regulations have
further defined this duty to ensure co-operation and co-ordination between employers who share a workplace
and to ensure that persons working in other employers premises are provided with information and instruction.
36
Duties when controlling premises
Section 4
INFORMATION
It is the duty of the person, persons or body in control of
premises (to any extent) to take such measures as is reasonable
(given the extent to which he is in control of the premises) to
Duties when controlling premises
ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable that they are safe and
without health risks.
37
Duties of Persons in Control of Premises
Section 4 - Duties of Persons in Control of Premises

It is the duty of the person, persons or body in control of premises (to any extent) to take such measures as is
reasonable (given the extent to which he is in control of the premises) to ensure, so far as is reasonably
practicable that:
• The premises.
• The means of access and egress.
• The plant and substances provided for use there are safe and without health risks.
Where a contract or lease expressly or by implication places responsibility for:

• Maintenance and/or repair of premises.
• Health and safety obligations in connection with plant and substances in premises upon a particular person
or body, that person or body is deemed to be in control.
Those who have any control over premises must consider the safety of anyone who comes onto the premises to
carry out work, e.g. contractors, or anyone who comes on the premises to use any plant or substances, e.g. a
customer in a launderette.
37
Duties of suppliers
Section 6
INFORMATION
Duties of suppliers
It shall be the duty of any person who designs, manufactures,
imports or supplies any article for use at work or any article of
fairground equipment to ensure, so far as is reasonably
practicable, that
38
Duties of suppliers
Section 6 - Duties of Designers, Manufacturers and Suppliers of Articles and Substances for use at Work
The Section requires that, so far as is reasonably practicable, designers, manufacturers (including sub-
manufacturers), importers and suppliers of articles and substances for use at work should:
• Ensure articles are designed and constructed so as to be safe and without health risks when being set, used
cleaned or maintained;
• Ensure substances are safe and without health risks when being used, handled, processed, stored, or
transported;
• Carry out or arrange for the carrying out of testing, research and examination which may be necessary to
comply with the above;
• Provide information about the use for which the product has been designed and tested, and about any
conditions necessary to ensure that when put to use or being dismantled or disposed of, the product will be
safe and without health risks;
• Take steps to inform those who have been supplied with an article or substance of any new information which
may give rise to a serious risk to health or safety.
Certain duties under this section can be transferred to another party in the supply chain, including the customer.
The two parties must however have a written undertaking stating the matters involved and the related steps to be
taken for safety. The undertaking will be acceptable only if it is reasonable, for example if an article has been
ordered to a customer’s own specification or is to be a component in another article.
The importer of any article or substance has a duty to ensure that the article or substance complies with UK
requirements as far as its design and manufacture is concerned.
Installers and erectors of equipment and machinery for use at work must, so far as is reasonably practicable,
ensure that no health and safety hazards arise from the method of installation or erection.
This section was substantially altered by the Consumer Protection Act 1987. Those new parts, which relate only to
fairground equipment, have not been referred in these notes.
38
Duties of employees
Section 7
INFORMATION
It shall be the duty of every employee while at work to take
reasonable care for the health and safety of himself and of other
persons who may be affected by his acts or omissions at work.
Duties of employees
Section 8
No person shall intentionally or recklessly interfere with or
misuse anything provided in the interests of health, safety, or
welfare in pursuance of any of the relevant statutory provisions.
39
Duties of employees
Section 7 – General Duties of Employees at Work

It shall be the duty of every employee while at work to take reasonable care for the health and safety of himself
and of other persons who may be affected by his acts or omissions at work.
As regards any duty or requirement imposed on his employer or any other person by or under any of the relevant
statutory provisions to co-operate with him so far as is necessary to enable that duty or requirement to be
performed or complied with.
Note that everyone in an organisation is an employee from the Chairman, Managing Director, Chief Executive etc.
down, but also see Section 37 for additional duties placed on those who act in these capacities.
The general duties of employees have been extended by Regulation 14 of the Management Regulations to require
an employee to carry out any work in accordance with any training or instruction and to inform the employer of
any health and safety problems.
When would section 7 be used?

Section 7 is actually a relatively rarely used provision of the HSWA that involves criminal prosecution of an
individual. If the employer appears primarily responsible for the incident, then action will normally only be taken
against the employer. However, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) says within its guidance that “where the
employer has taken all reasonably practicable steps to ensure compliance then action against the employee
should be considered”.
The critical question will be whether the employee failed to take “reasonable care”. Although this will be a
question of fact for the court, it’s important to note that this question is not concerned with how an accident
occurred but rather whether reasonable care was taken.
Section 8 - Duty not to Interfere with or Misuse things provided

No person shall intentionally or recklessly interfere with or misuse anything provided in the interests of health,
safety, or welfare in pursuance of any of the relevant statutory provisions. Deliberate acts such as defeating
interlocked safety guards would constitute an offence. It is interesting to note that this duty extends beyond the
employee as it refers to ‘no person’.
39
Duties of other persons
Section 36
INFORMATION
Where the commission by any person of an offence under any of
the relevant statutory provisions is due to the act or default of
some other person that other person shall be guilty of the
offence and a person may be charged with and convicted of the
offence, by virtue of this sub-section whether or not proceedings
are taken against the first-mentioned person.
40
Section 36 - Offences Due to Fault of Other Person

Where the commission by any person of an offence under any of the relevant statutory provisions is due to the act
or default of some other person that other person shall be guilty of the offence and a person may be charged with
and convicted of the offence, by virtue of this sub-section whether or not proceedings are taken against the first-
mentioned person.
An action under this section is not only possible against an employee, though it has seldom been used in this way,
but also against any other person (even, for example, a trespasser). The 'act' referred to will, in practice, almost
certainly need to be a 'wrongful' act.
Case studies
One example in which Section 36 is the prosecution of a health and safety Consultant in 2009. The Consultant
provided health and safety advisory services to a client and his work included the preparation of risk assessments.
He was prosecuted after an HSE investigation into a tipper truck incident at a client’s premises. The HSE site
inspection revealed a number of failings by the company which included the exposure of workers to silica dust and
the HSE decided that the risk assessment prepared by him was superficial and totally inadequate. This in turn led
to a high risk of exposure to respirable silica during stonemasonry work because effective measures to mitigate
silica exposure were not determined and implemented. Consultants should not offer advice on topics unless they
were fully qualified to do so. The Consultant was fined £1000 plus £700 for a breach of s.36 of HSWA for failing to
assess the risk of employees’ exposure to sandstone dust.
In another case a Health & Safety Consultant who prepared a risk assessment for a client on a spindle-moulding
machine was prosecuted after an employee of his client injured his hand whilst operating this machine and the
HSE prosecuted him under section 36 of the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974. The Magistrates' Court was told
that the Consultant’s risk assessment of the machine fell significantly short of the standards required, contributing
to the accident. Particularly, it failed to identify the danger of the machine snatching at pieces of wood. Although
the Consultant had many years health and safety experience, he was not familiar with wood working machinery.
The Consultant pleaded guilty, was fined £3,000 and ordered to pay £750 prosecution costs.
40
Senior persons duties
Section 37
INFORMATION
If a health and safety offence is committed with the consent or
connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of,
any director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the
organisation, then that person (as well as the organisation) can
be prosecuted.
41
HASAWA Section 37 – Offences by Bodies Corporate

Where an offence under any of the relevant statutory provisions committed by a body corporate is proved to have
been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to have been attributable to any neglect on the part of, any
director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate or a person who was purporting to act
in any such capacity, he/she as well as the body corporate shall be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be
proceeded against and punished accordingly.
Consent
Consent means knowing the material facts constituting the offence and agreeing to the conduct of the business
on the basis of those facts.
Connivance
Connivance is usually considered to be turning a blind eye; being aware of what is going on and whilst not actively
encouraging what happened, letting it continue and doing nothing.
Neglect
Neglect has the widest remit as it goes beyond what you actually knew and looks at what you ought to have
known. In the case of R v P Ltd (July 2007) the courts said:
"the question, at the end of the day, will always be whether the [director] should have, by reason of the
surrounding circumstances, being put on enquiry so as to require him to have taken steps to determine whether
or not the appropriate safety procedures were in place".
Essentially, a failure to have in place adequate systems which would enable you to detect a problem would
constitute neglect (e.g. lack of training or system checks).
Recent case law has confirmed that directors cannot avoid a charge of neglect under section 37 by arranging their
organisation’s business so as to leave them ignorant of circumstances which would trigger their obligation to
address health and safety breaches.
41
Case Studies
Section 2
CASE STUDIES
• R v British Airways Section 2
• R v Enterprise Managed Services
• R v Young’s Seafood
42
Case studies - Section 2

British Airways (2018) was fined £1.8m after an employee was crushed by a tug vehicle at Heathrow Airport.
An HSE investigation found that the practice of walking between the two provided lanes was unsafe and that
British Airways was in breach of health and safety regulations. The HSE identified significant failings in the general
management of health and safety and workplace transport risks, including issues relating to supervision and
monitoring, risk assessment and training.
HSE inspector Megan Carr described the situation, "an incident waiting to happen."
Enterprise Managed Services (2021) was fined £1m after a worker was fatally injured after tripping and falling
under the wheels of a reversing refuse lorry. The HSE investigation found that a suitable and sufficient risk
assessment had not been carried out for their collection route and there was a failure to adequately supervise the
Daventry waste and recycling round. An HSE Inspector stated that "those in control of workplaces are responsible
for identifying and implementing suitable methods of working to reduce the need for vehicle reversing."
Young's Seafood (2021) was fined £787k after an employee lost two fingers in a fishcake machine.
When the member of staff lifted a guard to clean, this should have stopped the machine from running. Instead, it
continued to run and did not even respond to the emergency stop button. The HSE investigation found poor
communication between maintenance and the shop floor plus an inadequate fault reporting system
42
Case Studies
Section 3
CASE STUDIES
• R v Board of Trustees of the Science Section 3
• R v Porter (2008)
• R V Associated Octel
43
Case studies - Section 3
Board of Trustees of the Science Museum [1993]. This prosecution was brought due to bacteria capable of
causing Legionnaire's disease being discovered in water systems in the museum. There was no proof of harm but
Steyn LJ said of the word "risks" in section 3, that it, "conveys the idea of a possibility of danger." Significantly (as
it later turned out) the judgment also referred to "the imperative of protecting public health and safety“.
The prosecution alleged that due to lack of maintenance of an air conditioning system, members of the public
had been exposed to risks to their health from Legionella pneumophila. Subsequent sampling revealed no
presence of Legionella. The defence argued that the prosecution had to prove a real danger, i.e. that the bacteria
were present and had been inhaled by a member of the public. They were fined £500 plus £35,000 costs. Note:
you do not have to wait for injury / illness to occur before a prosecution can be brought.
R -v- Porter [2008] In this case the definition of risk as a "possibility of danger", appeared to be qualified by the
decision in R -v- Porter [2008] in which a child sustained fatal injuries in a fall down steps at school. Prosecution
was commenced against the headmaster of the school and Moses LJ, in acquitting the headmaster on appeal said:
"What is important is that the risk which the prosecution must prove should be real as opposed to a fanciful or
hypothetical... There is no obligation...to alleviate those risks which are merely fanciful."
R v Associated Octel (1996) The defendant operated a large chemical plant at Ellesmere Port. In June 1990, while
the plant was shut down for annual maintenance, a firm called Resin Glass Products Ltd (RGP) was engaged in
repairing the lining of a tank. One of RGP's employees, Mr Cuthbert, was cleaning the lining of the tank with
acetone (a supply of which he had in an old paint bucket). The electric bulb by whose light he was working broke
and ignited the flammable vapour from the acetone in the bucket, causing a flash fire in which Mr Cuthbert was
badly burned.
Octel submitted it had no case to answer because the injury to Mr Cuthbert was not caused by the way in which
Octel, as opposed to RGP, had conducted its undertaking. Control was essential to liability under section 3(1) and
Octel had no right to control the way its independent contractors did their work. The question was simply
whether the activity in question could be described as part of the employer's undertaking. In most cases the
answer would be obvious. Octel's undertaking was running a chemical plant and part of the conduct of that
undertaking was to have the chlorine tank repaired. Whether the activity which had caused the risk amounted to
part of the conduct by the employer of his undertaking must in each case be a question of fact. Octel was
prosecuted for breaching section 3 of HASAWA and appealed on the basis that the activity was not part of the
company's undertaking. The appeal failed and Octel was fined £25,000 and ordered to pay £60,000 costs.
43
Case Studies
Section 7
CASE STUDY
• Eardisley Sawmills Section 7
• West Coast Railway Company Limited
44
Case Studies - Section 7
Eardisley Sawmills (2008)

A forklift truck driver working at Eardisley Sawmills, Herefordshire was prosecuted by the HSE following serious
injuries caused to a colleague on 17th January 2007. The driver pleaded guilty to failing to take reasonable care
for the health and safety of other persons under Section 7 of HASAWA. The court imposed a fine of £1,750.
The Court heard that the driver was driving a rough-terrain forklift truck while the forks were loaded with a stack
of 12 modular sheds. As he moved forwards the load significantly obscured his vision and a fellow employee was
struck by the load causing a fractured pelvis, cuts and bruises.
HSE's investigating inspector said:

"It is important that individuals are aware that they, as well as their employer, have duties under the law to take
reasonable care of the health and safety of others who may be affected by their acts or omissions at work. The
driver's employer had employed an in-house forklift truck trainer and he had received regular refresher training
and re-testing.
"In this case his forward visibility was significantly obscured by the load and he could not see his colleague. The
injuries inflicted could have been significantly worse, or even fatal. Operators of lift trucks must ensure that they
operate them in accordance with the training they have been given to prevent such tragedies."
West Coast Railway Company Limited (2015)

A steam train driver employed by West Coast Railway Company Limited who had faced charges under section 7(a)
and 8. This related to his intentional misuse of the Train Protection and Warning System (TPWS) equipment and
the train passing a signal at danger near Wootton Bassett junction in Wiltshire. The steam train driver with 40
years’ experience, pleaded guilty and received a four month prison sentence, suspended for 18 months and was
ordered to do 80 hours of unpaid work.
44
Case Studies
Section 37
CASE STUDIES
• Easy Load Ltd
Section 37
• Celtic Rock Services Limited
45
Case Studies - Section 37

Easy Load Ltd
A SKIP-hire and waste-management company and its managing director have been sentenced after a
worker was seriously injured in a transport incident.
Folkestone Magistrates’ Court heard how, on 14 December 2018, an employee was crossing Lee’s Yard
in Dartford, Kent, while waiting for his articulated lorry to be re-loaded with processed waste when he
was hit by a 21-tonne loading shovel that was reversing around a blind bend in the yard. The employee
suffered life-changing injuries, from which he is still recovering, and is unable to return to work.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the company and its managing
director had failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that there was adequate pedestrian segregation
in the waste-processing yard so that both pedestrians and vehicles could circulate in a safe manner.
Although directors of the company were already aware of the risks to pedestrians due to previous
workplace transport incidents in the yard, they failed to respond appropriately and continued to ignore
the advice of their health and safety consultant and the HSE, leaving workers exposed to the risks.
Easy Load Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) by virtue of Regulation 17(1) of the Workplace
(Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 and were fined £150,000 and ordered to pay costs of
£7,454.20.
The managing director of Easy Load Ltd, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 37 of the Health & Safety at
Work etc. Act 1974 and was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, suspended for two years, and
ordered to pay £549.40 in costs.
Speaking after the hearing, the HSE Inspector said: ‘Workplace transport activities are one of the biggest
risks in the waste and recycling industry. This incident, and the resulting life-changing injuries suffered,
were avoidable and occurred as a result of a fundamental management failing on the part of the
company and its directors, who patently failed to address and control clear risks which had been
brought to their attention.
‘The HSE will not hesitate to hold companies, individual directors, board members and business owners
to account where management failings are found to be at the root of any health and safety offending.
A Celtic Rock Services Limited (2018)

A director of Celtic Rock Services Limited (CRS), pled guilty to breaching section 37 of the Health and
Safety at Work Act 1974, and received a suspended 12 week sentence and a 12 week curfew together
with a requirement to pay his employees' legal costs of £3,560.
Both the director and CRS failed to prevent three company employees from developing hand arm
vibration syndrome (HAVS). The work conducted for CRS by the three employees included using heavy
drilling and hammering machinery, often using the tools horizontally on cliff side sites. Risk assessments
completed by CRS failed to identify the level of exposure to the vibrations that led to HAVS and used
data which was not up to date. Although the first symptoms of HAVS were identified in 2000, it was
only in 2016 that the HAVS problem was recognised by the company.
Employees were not informed about the risks of HAVS nor did CRS have a system to monitor the health
of its employees until 2016, at which point HAVS was diagnosed among employees when an
occupational nurse was employed by the company. At the point of identification, however, CRS failed to
take action to prevent further harm.
The director received a suspended 12 week sentence and a 12 week curfew together with a
requirement to pay his employees' legal costs of £3,560.
45
Levels of duty
• Absolute
INFORMATION
• Practicable
• Reasonably care Levels of duty
46
Levels of Duty
Health and Safety legislation is qualified by one of the following key words:
Absolute Duty
Requirements which must be carried out regardless of cost, time etc and the legislation usually uses words such as
‘will’, ‘must’ and ‘shall’. An example of an absolute duty is the requirement to carry out risk assessments, there is
no option but for an employer to conduct these.
Practicable Duty
Requirements, which must be carried out “so far as is practicable”. Practicability is that of current knowledge and
invention – once something is found to be practicable it is feasible and must be done irrespective of cost or
inconvenience. An example of a practicable duty is that of guarding a piece of machinery, regardless of the cost, if
it is technically possible, then it should be done.
Reasonable care
Reasonable care is the degree of caution and concern for the safety of himself/herself and others an ordinarily
prudent and rational person would use in the circumstances.
46
Reasonably practicable
• Reversal
INFORMATION
• Balance
• Quantum of
risk versus necessary sacrifice
47
Reversal
If the prosecution establish to the criminal standard of proof (i.e. near certainty) that there was a risk to
employees or others, the burden of proof shifts to the Defendant to establish to the civil standard of proof (i.e.
slightly more likely than not) that it did all that was reasonably practicable to ensure the safety of its staff/others.
This reversal is found in Section 40 of HASAWA which explains:
“It shall be for the accused to prove (as the case may be) that it was not practicable or not reasonably practicable
to do more than was in fact done to satisfy the duty or requirement. In any prosecution it is the responsibility of
the accused to show that it was not reasonably practicable for them to do more than they had in fact done to
comply with the duty”
So far as is reasonably practicable

The term "so far as is reasonably practicable" occurs in Sections 2, 3 & 6 of the HSAWA and means that the degree
of risk in a particular situation can be balanced against the time, trouble, cost and physical difficulty of taking
measures to avoid the risk. If these resources are so disproportionate to the risk that it would be unreasonable to
expect any employer to have to incur them to prevent it, the employer is not obliged to do so unless there is a
specific requirement that he does.
The greater the risk, the more likely it is that it is reasonable to go to very substantial expense, trouble and
invention to reduce it. But if the consequences and extent of a risk are small, insistence on great expense would
not be considered reasonable. It is important to remember that the judgement is an objective one and the size or
financial position of the employer are immaterial.
Where it can be shown that an assessment has been made and that the difficulties and costs of reducing the risks
further would be grossly disproportionate to the risks then it can be taken that everything that is reasonably
practicable has been done. On the other hand, where the risk is high, action must be taken at whatever cost. In
considering the cost, no allowance should be made for the size, nature of profitability, or the business concerned.
Edwards v National Coal Board [1949]

In the case of (Edwards v National Coal Board [1949] the judge said “Reasonably practicable is a narrower term
than “physically possible” and implies that a computation must be made in which the quantum of risk is placed in
one scale and the sacrifice, whether in money, time or trouble, involved in the measures necessary to avert the
risk is placed in the other, and that, if it is shown that there is a gross disproportion between them, the risk being
insignificant in relation to the sacrifice, the person upon whom the duty is laid discharges the burden of proving
that compliance was not reasonably practicable. This computation falls to be made at a point of time anterior to
the happening of the incident complained of”.
Over the years it has proved difficult to persuade the courts that, particularly when there has been an accident,
everything reasonably practicable has been done. As a result, defence tactics have shifted from trying to prove a
reasonable practicality defence, to challenge the level of risk which ought to prompt all reasonably practicable
steps being taken. After all, if there isn't a "risk" about which there is a need to do anything, the fact that it might
have been reasonably practicable to do something about it doesn't even arise.
47
Exercise – The Timber Yard
Exercise
The Timber Yard
Reasonably Practicable
48
The Timber Yard – what is reasonably practicable
A employee works in timber merchants. There a chance s/he may get a splinter when
handling timber? What control measures would you put in place?
Forklift trucks operate in the area and there is a risk of vehicle pedestrian collision. What
measures would you put in place?
Risk Control
Getting splinters when handling wood Provide protective gloves
Segregation measures from Fork lifts Licenced drivers only
48
Powers of Inspectors
INFORMATION
49
The powers of an Inspector include:
• The right to enter premises at any reasonable time
• The right to enter at any time if they think there is a "dangerous" situation.
• To take with them a Police Constable if they have cause to think they may be obstructed.
• To take with them any other person e.g. a specialist.
• To take samples, measurements, photographs etc.
• To direct those areas are left undisturbed.
• To test and/or confiscate articles and substances.
• To inspect and take copies of documents.
• To interview any person and to require them to sign a declaration that their answers are true.
• To seize and destroy or make harmless anything which they believe to be an immediate serious risk to health
or safety.
• To require any person to provide any other facility that the person can give to assist the Inspector.
Which Enforcing Authority?

Responsibility for enforcing health and safety legislation is shared between the HSE and Local Authorities (usually
Environmental Health Departments) by the Health and Safety (Enforcing Authority) Regulations 1998, and
depends upon the main activity undertaken at a workplace.
The HSE generally enforce at industrial premises (e.g. Agriculture, construction, fairgrounds, mines,
manufacturing, schools and colleges) and Local Authority enforced premises include: retail premises, offices,
hospitality and leisure activities. The powers and enforcement options available to both types of inspector are
identical.
49
Enforcement Action
INFORMATION
Enforcement Action
Enforcement Action
Informal
Simply ask verbally for something to be put right. They may confirm their requirement in a letter to the person in
control.
Improvement Notice
They may issue an Improvement Notice if there is a breach of legislation. The notice must specify the statutory
provision, which is breached, and give a set time period, not less than 21 days for the necessary action to be
taken.
Prohibition Notice
If they believe there is an immediate risk of serious personal injury, they may issue a Prohibition Notice. This
requires the activity to stop, machine not be used, area not to be entered etc until matters are put right. It is an
imprisonable offence to contravene a prohibition notice. A deferred Prohibition Notice can be issued if the risk is
not immediate. They may decide to prosecute. This can be instead of, or as well as, any of the above actions.
Prosecution
Any breach of HASAWA, or other relevant statutory provision is a criminal offence. Health and safety offences may
be:
• Summary offences can only be dealt with in a magistrate’s court;
• Indictable offences: magistrates may commit an offender to Crown Court for trial;
• Triable either way may be dealt with summarily, or on indictment, depending upon the severity of the
offence and the wishes of the accused.
50
Charges brought by the regulator
• Code for Crown Prosecutors
INFORMATION
• Enforcement Policy Statement
• The Enforcement Management Model (EMM) Charges brought by the regulator
51
Charges brought by the regulator

Enforcement Policy Statement
HSE (or another relevant enforcing authority, for example a local authority) will investigate and, where
appropriate, prosecute breaches of health and safety law. The Enforcement Policy Statement emphasises the
serious nature of any death resulting from work activities. In accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors,
the Approval Officer must apply the Full Code Test, which consists of two stages:
• The Evidential Stage
• The Public Interest Stage
The process of making enforcement decisions is complex. Each duty holder and situation is unique, and it is vital
that inspectors have wide discretion to exercise their professional judgement, so that appropriate action can be
taken.
Enforcement decisions must be impartial, justified and procedurally correct. The EPS sets out the approach which
health and safety enforcing authorities should follow
The Enforcement Management Model (EMM)
The EMM provides HSE with a framework for making enforcement decisions that meet the EPS principles of
proportionality, consistency, targeting, transparency and accountability. It captures the issues inspectors consider
when exercising their professional judgment, and reflects the process by which enforcement decisions are
reached.
The Enforcement Policy Statement and the Code for Crown Prosecutors have been published, so that the
principles which HSE will apply when deciding whether to prosecute are clear. The information contained in these
documents is therefore important to inspectors, other criminal justice agencies, dutyholders, the general public,
and victims of incidents arising from work activities. Whilst they are public documents, any documents generated
as part of, or to assist, the approval process may be legally privileged.
The Approval Officer will be assisted by the guidance obtained from the EMM, but each case is unique and must
be considered on its own merits. There will be different factors to be taken into account in each approval decision.
The investigating inspector must show that:
• The Statutory duty applied.
• There was a breach of that duty.
• The breach of the duty caused the injury.
• The statute was intended to prevent this sort of accident.
Remember a failure to adequately control exposure to a recognised risk is enough for you to fall foul of the law.
There does not have to be a resulting injury. See Board of Trustees of the Science Museum [1993].
51
Health & Safety Offences
• Current maximum sentencing (since 2015)
INFORMATION
Magistrates Court Crown Court
Health and safety offences
Unlimited fine Unlimited fine
6 months imprisonment 2 years imprisonment
52
Health and Safety Offences
Penalties
The maximum sentence for health and safety offences depends on the date that the offence was committed and
the court that passes sentence. This is because the Health and Safety (Offences) Act 2008 increased penalties for
some offences committed post 16th January 2009 (by increasing the maximum fine and introducing imprisonment
for certain offences) and Section 85 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (which
came into force on 12th March 2015) had the effect of increasing the level of most fines available for magistrates’
courts to an unlimited fine (previously £20,000 for most health and safety offences) or imprisonment for a term
not exceeding 6 months or both. In the Crown Court, the maximum penalty is an unlimited fine or imprisonment
not exceeding two years or both.
Breach of duties under sections 2 to 6 HSWA

The maximum sentence for failing to discharge a duty under these sections depends on the date of the
commission of the offence For offences committed before 16th January 2009, the offence carries a maximum
penalty in the magistrates' court of a £20,000 fine. The maximum penalty in the Crown Court is an unlimited fine.
For offences committed between the 16th January 2009 and before the 12th March 2015, the offence carries a
maximum fine on conviction in the magistrates' court of £20,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6
months or both. The maximum penalty in the Crown Court is an unlimited fine or imprisonment not exceeding
two years or both.1
For offences committed on and after the 12th March 2015 the maximum penalty in the magistrates' court is an
unlimited fine2 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or both. In the Crown Court, the maximum
penalty is an unlimited fine or imprisonment not exceeding two years or both
Sentencing Council
In accordance with the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, The Health and Safety Offences, Corporate Manslaughter
and Food Safety and Hygiene Offences Definitive Guidelines were introduced on the 01st February 2016. This has
seen a significant increase in the fines courts are assigning to those who breach Health and Safety legislation. In
order to determine the fine an organisation will receive, Judges are now able to use culpability and harm
categories and the organisations annual turnover as a starting point in which to increase or decrease dependent
on mitigating factors of the case.
52
The H&S (Fees) Regulations 2012
• The regulations
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Application
Material breach
Cost
H&S (Fees) Regulations 2012
• Appeal
Fee for Intervention
53
The Health and Safety (Fees) Regulations 2012

The Health and Safety (Fees) Regulations 2012 put a duty on HSE to recover its costs for carrying out its regulatory
functions from those found to be in material breach of health and safety law. This shifts some of the cost of health
and safety regulation from the public purse to those businesses and organisations that break health and safety
laws.
Fees for Intervention
If you are found to be in material breach of health and safety law, you will have to pay for the time it takes the HSE
To identify the breach and help you put things right. This includes investigating and taking enforcement action
and is called fee for intervention (FFI).
Dutyholders who comply with the law, or where there is no material breach, will not be charged FFI for any work
that HSE does with them.
Who FFI applies to
It applies to dutyholders where HSE is the enforcing authority. This will include employers, Self-employed who put
others at risk, public and limited companies, general, limited and limited liability partnerships and Crown and
public bodies.
What the law says
The Health and Safety and Nuclear (Fees) Regulations 2021 say that a fee is payable to HSE if:
• a person is contravening or has contravened health and safety laws; and
• an inspector is of the opinion that the person is or has done so, and notifies the person in writing of that
opinion.
What is a material breach?
A material breach is something which an inspector considers serious enough that they need to formally write to
the business requiring action to be taken to deal with the material breach. If the inspector gives you a notification
of contravention (NoC) after their visit, you'll have to pay a fee. The NoC must include the law that the inspector
considers has been broken and the reason(s) for their opinion
How much it costs
It currently costs £160 an hour. The fee will include the costs covering the time of the entire original visit. The total
amount recovered will be based on the amount of time it takes HSE to identify the breach and help you put things
right (including associated office work), multiplied by the hourly rate.
The fee can vary depending on:
• how long the original visit was
• the time the inspector spent helping you put things right
• the time it took the inspector to investigate your case
• any time we spend on taking action against you
Payment of an invoice could be used in a criminal prosecution as evidence of an admission that there was a
material breach.
Appeal process
You can decide whether to pay the invoice. The HSE can enforce payment through a civil action and the HSE could
do that before the appeal is determined, this is decided on a case by case basis.
53
Manslaughter
• Manslaughter is ‘Common Law’ offence
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Voluntary – Murder reduced to Manslaughter
Involuntary – By Gross Negligence
Even when unaware of the risks created
Manslaughter and Gross Negligence
•
•
House of Lords - Four stage ‘test’
Unlimited fine and a maximum of life imprisonment
Manslaughter
54
Manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter
Manslaughter (culpable homicide in Scotland)

Manslaughter is a 'common law' offence, i.e. it has been developed by judges and is not contained in a legislative
statute. Manslaughter may be:
• Voluntary - where all the elements of murder are present but the crime is reduced to manslaughter by means of
a special defence; or
• Involuntary - where a death is caused through gross negligence.
The jury will have to consider whether the extent to which the defendant's conduct departed from the proper
standard of care incumbent upon him, involving as it must have done a risk of death, was such that it could be
judged criminal.
The courts have held that a person can be found guilty of manslaughter even when he or she is unaware of the
risks that were created by his or her conduct. However, any evidence of awareness may assist the jury in coming
to a conclusion that the defendant was grossly negligent.
Gross Negligence Manslaughter

Employees including individual directors are also potentially liable for other related offences, such as the common
law offence of gross negligence manslaughter. Under the common law, gross negligence manslaughter is proved
when individual officers of a company (directors or business owners) by their own grossly negligent behaviour
cause death. This offence is punishable by an unlimited fine and a maximum of life imprisonment.
Four stage test

The House of Lords laid down a four stage test for involuntary manslaughter by means of a grossly negligent act or
omission in R.v. Adomako (1994)
1) Did the defendant owe a duty of care towards the victim who has died?
2) If so, has the defendant breached that duty of care?
3) Has such breach caused the victim's death? (The law of negligence must be applied to ascertain whether or
not there has been a breach of the duty); and
4) If so, was that breach of duty so bad as to amount, when viewed objectively, to gross negligence warranting a
criminal conviction?
54
Corporate killing
INFORMATION
Difficult to prosecute
Corporate killing
55
Corporate killing
History
Historically, in order to prosecute companies for the criminal offence of manslaughter, it was necessary to identify
an individual who could be described as ‘the embodiment of the company itself’. It was only possible to convict
the company if such an individual was also found guilty of the offence of manslaughter. Therefore, if it was not
possible to prosecute and convict the individual, the prosecution against the company was bound to fail. This led
to great difficulties in prosecuting companies for manslaughter as it was not always possible to identify a
‘controlling mind’ who also had sufficient mens rea or ‘guilty mind’ to be convicted of the offence.
Consequently, there were not many successful prosecutions of companies for manslaughter, and only then against
small corporate entities. The low numbers of manslaughter cases in relation to deaths at work brought before the
courts did not reflect any unwillingness on the part of the health and safety enforcing authorities to refer such
cases to the CPS and the police.
Justice Taylor stated in a 1990 ruling concerning the trial of P&O European Ferries for the manslaughter of those
who died in the Zeebrugge Disaster:
"where a corporation, through the controlling mind of one of its agents, does an act which fulfils the pre-
requisites for the crime of manslaughter, it is properly indictable for the crime of manslaughter.“ Death or
personal injury resulting from major disasters is rarely due to the negligence of a single individual. In the majority
of such cases the disaster is caused as a result of the failure of systems controlling the risk, with the carelessness
of individuals being a contributing factor. In the past there have been a number of disasters leading to failed
prosecutions for corporate manslaughter, including:
The Herald of Free Enterprise disaster on 6 March 1987 where the jury at the inquest returned verdicts of
unlawful killing in 187 cases and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) launched prosecutions against 7
individuals and the company. The case failed because the various acts of negligence could not be aggregated and
attributed to any individual who was a directing mind.
The Southall rail crash on 19 September 1997 which resulted in 7 deaths and 151 injuries. Great Western Trains
(GWT) pleaded guilty to contravening Section 3(1) of HASAWA and received a record fine for a health and safety
offence of £1.5 million. Mr Justice Scott-Baker expressed his concern regarding “a serious fault of senior
management”. However it had earlier been ruled that a charge of manslaughter could not succeed because of the
need to identify some person whose gross negligence was that of GWT itself.
55
Corporate Manslaughter
& Corporate Homicide Act 2007 INFORMATION
An offence of which the key components are:
• the way activities are managed or organised
• causes a persons death
Corporate Manslaughter &
• amounts to a gross breach
• senior management is significant element in the breach Corporate Homicide Act 2007
56
Corporate Manslaughter & Corporate Homicide Act 2007
Following these disasters and comprehensive reports on this issue prepared by the Law Commission in 1997 and
2000, a draft Corporate Manslaughter Bill was published in March 2005. The Act came into force on 6 April 2008,
making prosecution for larger companies easier and creates a new offence which replaces the common law
offence of manslaughter by gross negligence for companies and organisations.
“An organisation is guilty of an offence if the way in which its activities are managed or organised causes a
person’s death and amounts to a gross breach of a relevant duty of care owed by the organisation to the
deceased”.
“An organisation is guilty of an offence under this section only if the way its activities are managed or organised by
it’s senior management is a substantial element of the breach referred to in subsection (1)”.
Key terms
• Managed
• Organised
• Causes a persons death
• Gross breach
• Senior management failing is a substantial element
56
What is a gross breach?
INFORMATION
57
Gross negligence – and the Law

If there was a gross breach of that duty; and once a relevant duty of care has been established any breach must
fall far below what could reasonably be expected of the organisation in the circumstances. In considering whether
the breach was gross, Section 8 of the Act requires the jury to consider any evidence which shows that health and
safety legislation was breached. If a jury concludes that health and safety legislation was breached, the jury must
then consider:-
• how serious the breach was and
• how much of a risk of death it posed
Guidance Available
The jury may also have regard to any relevant health and safety guidance issued by an enforcing authority which
exists. This would include ACoP’s and health and safety guidance issued by HSE.
Organisations culture
The jury may also consider issues such as “attitudes, policies, systems or accepted practices within the
organisation that were likely to have encouraged any failure or to have produced a tolerance to it”.
HSE involvement
In the context of a work-related death protocol investigation it is highly likely that HSE will be able to assist the
police and the CPS in identifying relevant publications, evidence of breach of relevant health and safety legislation
and any evidence either current or historical of attitudes, policies etc which may have contributed or encouraged
the failure. This may include any previous enforcement action taken by the HSE or previous relevant advice.
Inspectors opinions
The HSE may also be asked to provide the CPS or the police with a view as to how far below the relevant standard
an organisation has fallen. Investigating inspectors should think carefully about whether they are qualified to
provide such an opinion and should consider whether specialist inspectors or other experts in the relevant field
would be better placed.
57
Case Studies
Corporate manslaughter examples
CASE STUDIES
•
•
Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings Ltd
Lion Steel Limited
Corporate manslaughter
• Pyranha Mouldings Ltd
• Huntley Mount Engineering
58
Case studies -Corporate manslaughter

Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings Ltd convicted and fined £385k
This was the first prosecution brought under the Act following the unlawful killing of a young geologist. Mr Peter
Eaton, first appeared at Stroud magistrates court in June 2009 to face manslaughter charges both on behalf of the
company and as an individual. Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings Ltd on 17 February 2011 were found guilty and
fined £385,000 following a two week trial. The judge, in handing down the sentence, confirmed Cotswold
Geotechnical Holdings Ltd could pay the fine over 10-year period but not any costs. In consideration of the fine of
£385,000; in 2008 Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings employed eight people and had a turnover of £333,000.
Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings appealed against the Judge’s decision however this was turned down in May
2011 with the Judge in the Court of Appeal upholding the original fine
Lion Steel Limited convicted and fined £480k and costs of £84,000
Lion Steel maintenance worker Steven Berry died from his injuries after an accident on 28 May 2008 when he fell
through a fibreglass roof light 13 metres to the factory floor at Hyde in Cheshire, while carrying out a roof repair.
Lion Steel Equipment Limited became only the third company in the UK to be convicted of corporate
manslaughter under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act, since it came into force in 2008,
and was fined £480,000 and ordered to pay prosecution costs of £84,000.
Pyranha Mouldings Ltd convicted and fined £200,000 and costs of £90,000
Following a trial at Liverpool Crown Court, the trial Judge passed sentence today whilst sitting at the Royal Courts
of Justice. Company director Peter Mackereth was sentenced to nine months in prison suspended for two years
and fined £25,000 and Pyranha Mouldings Ltd. were fined £200,000. Pyranha Mouldings Ltd. and Peter Mackereth
were also asked to pay costs of £90,000 between them. Alan Catterall was a supervisor for Pyranha Mouldings
Ltd., a company which manufactures plastic kayaks and canoes. On the morning of 23 December 2010 a fault
developed on one of the ovens used to create the kayak moulds, which was then out of service whilst
maintenance work was carried out. Once the initial fault was fixed Mr Catterall began working on the machine,
however the oven was turned back on with Mr Catterall inside. Mr Catterall had no means of escape and no alarm,
due to the unique design of the oven which had been developed by Pyranha Mouldings Ltd. Mark Auty, senior
specialist prosecutor with the CPS said, “Mr Catterall’s death was caused by the serious failings of his employer,
Pyranha Mouldings Ltd. This wasn’t just a tragic situation; it was a tragedy waiting to happen. Mr Catterall’s death
is all the more upsetting because it was avoidable.
Huntley Mount Engineering, fined £150,000 for corporate manslaughter and company director jailed
Huntley Mount Engineering Limited were fined £150,000 for the Corporate Manslaughter of Cameron Minshull,
an apprentice who had only recently started working at the company at the time of his death.
Mr Minshull was allowed to work without meaningful supervision on dangerous and defective equipment.
Company director, Zaffar Hussain was also jailed for eight months for offences under Section 2 and Section 37 of
the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. His son, Akbar Hussain received a four-month jail sentence, suspended
for a year and fined £3,000. The agency that placed Mr Minshull at the firm, Lime People Training Solutions, were
also fined £75,000 for putting him in a dangerous work environment and ordered to pay £25,000 in costs.
58
Company director disqualification
• Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986
INFORMATION
• Maximum disqualification of 15 years
• Disqualification process is Civil not Criminal Company director disqualification
59
Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986
Disqualification
In addition to for fines and imprisonment the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, section 2(1),
empowers the court to disqualify an individual convicted of an offence in connection with the management of a
company. This includes health and safety offences and this power is exercised at the discretion of the court and
requires no additional investigation or evidence.
The CDDA empowers the courts to make a disqualification order in relation to a person who has been found guilty
of an indictable offence in connection with the promotion, formation, management, liquidation or striking off of a
company.
This includes health and safety offences “in connection with the management of a company”.
The maximum period of disqualification is 15 years, though if the order is made by a magistrates court the
maximum is five years.
Disqualification proceedings are civil and not criminal, although the order may be made following criminal
proceedings by the court which convicted the person concerned.
59
Remedial and publicity orders
• Remedial order
INFORMATION
Remedial Orders & Publicity Orders
 Remedy the Breach and matters arising
 Address deficiency in policies, systems or practices
• Publicity orders
 Specified details about the offence
 The amount of the fine imposed
 The terms of any remedial orders
60
Remedial Orders and Publicity Orders
Remedial order
The court may make a remedial order requiring the guilty organisation to take specified steps to remedy:
• The relevant breach;
• Matters arising from the relevant breach which contributed to the cause of the death; and
• Any deficiency in the organisation’s health and safety policies, systems or practices.
Publicity order
The court may also make a publicity order requiring the organisation to publicise in a specified manner:
• The fact that it has been convicted of the offence;
• Specified particulars of the offence;
• The amount of any fine imposed;
• The terms of any remedial order made.
60
Module 1 – The financial reason
Piper Alpha 1988
MODULE 1
167 deaths
£2 billion total costs
£746 million insurance pay outs
The financial reason
61
Module 1 – The financial reason
The Financial Reason

The final compelling reason to ensure health and safety is managed properly is the financial reason. Some say if
you think health and safety is expensive then try having an accident and this is certainly illustrated when you look
some of the costs associated with some catastrophic incidents that litter our history including:
Piper Alpha - 167 lives lost and cost over £2 billion, including £746 million insurance payouts.
Buncefield - 43 people injured, nearby businesses destroyed and around £1 billion total costs.
BP refinery Grangemouth - fire in 1987 cost £50 million in property damage and a further £50 million due to
business interruption.
In it’s report ‘Costs to Britain of workplace fatalities and self-reported injuries and ill health, 2018/19’ published
August 2020 https://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/pdf/cost-to-britain.pdf the HSE remind us that each year, over a
million workers are injured or made ill by their work in Great Britain. The impacts can be measured in terms of
‘human’ costs (the impact on the individual’s quality of life and, for fatal injuries, loss of life), and ‘financial’ costs,
such as loss of production and healthcare costs.
HSE’s cost estimates (for 2018/19) include only new cases of work-related ill health and self-reported injuries, and
exclude pre-existing cases, to represent the costs arising from current working conditions. Total to costs Britain
were around £16.2bn in 2018/19
At a local level businesses may incur significant costs following an accident at work. Disruption to production,
replacing staff, investigation time to name a few. They’re all calculable yet because some costs are more difficult
to quantify than others few companies had any idea what accidents at work really cost them, nor the means to
find out.
61
Exercise – Accident Costs?
What are the costs your business would face following a serious
EXERCISE
Accident Costs
accident at work?
62
List all direct and indirect costs associated with a serious accident
Costs
62
Direct and Indirect costs
• Direct Costs – directly related
INFORMATION
 Insured direct costs
 Uninsured direct costs
• Indirect Costs – not directly related
Direct and Indirect costs
 Insured direct costs
 Uninsured indirect costs
63
Direct and Indirect Costs

The costs associated with an accident will either be direct costs or indirect costs.
Direct costs
These are costs which are directly related to the accident and may be insured or uninsured.
Insured direct costs normally include:

• Claims on employers and public liability insurance
• Damage to buildings, equipment or vehicles
• Any attributable production and/or general business loss.
Uninsured direct costs include:

• Fines resulting from prosecution by the enforcement authority
• Sick pay
• Damage not directly attributable to the accident (e.g. caused by replacement staff)
• Increases in insurance premiums following the accident
Indirect Costs
Indirect costs - are costs which may not be directly attributable to the accident but may result from a series of
accidents, again these may be insured or uninsured.
Insured indirect costs can include:

• Cumulative business loss
• Product or process liability claims
• Recruitment of certain replacement staff.
Uninsured indirect costs include:

• Loss of goodwill and a poor corporate image
• Accident investigation time and any subsequent remedial action required
• Production delays
• Extra overtime payments
• Lost time for other employees, such as a First Aider, who attend to the needs of the injured person
• The recruitment and training of most replacement staff
• First aid provision and training
• Lower employee morale possibly leading to reduced productivity
Some items, such as business loss, may be uninsurable or too prohibitively expensive to insure. Therefore,
insurance policies can never cover all of the costs of an accident either because some items are not covered by the
policy or the insurance excess is greater than the particular item cost.
63
Insured v Uninsured Costs
INFORMATION
Insured v Uninsured Costs
64
Insured and Uninsured costs
Ratio
In it’s publication HSG101’ The cost to Britain of workplace accidents and work-related ill health in 1995/96
https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/hsg101.pdf the HSE found that uninsured losses ranged from 1:8 to 1:36.
That meant for every £1 they paid in insurance premiums, the companies had to meet a further £8 to £36
themselves for losses arising from accidents.
One way to illustrate this is to consider the iceberg theory of safety analogy where 10% of the mass of the iceberg
sits above the surface and is visible and represents insured costs) whereas 90% of the mass sits beneath the
surface and contains ‘hidden’ and mostly uninsured costs.
64
Accident cost case studies
INFORMATION
HSE Case studies to identify the cost of accidents
Accident cost case studies
 Case Study 1 – Construction
 Case Study 3 - Transport
 Case Study 5 - Hospital
65
Accident cost case Studies

The question is how do we put forward a compelling argument that things need to change because of the financial
impact accidents are having on our business? One way is to calculate the cost and then present this in a way that
resonates with the decision makers.
Between 1990 and 1991 the HSE carried out some research with participating companies to identify the cost of
accidents, which in their opinion of the steering group, could have been prevented. The accident outcomes were
classified according to severity as:
• Specified Major Injury.

• Over three day injury – RIDDOR amended 2013 (Over seven day injury)
• Minor injuries.
• No injury.
The methodology accounted separately for the financial and opportunity costs, which arose from each accident.
Financial costs are the additional costs incurred to return the situation to what it was before an accident
happened. This covers both material and labour costs.
Opportunity costs are the costs of lost opportunities, either through people having to stand idle or not being able
to produce at their regular job by virtue of being redirected to deal with the consequences of an accident.
None of the participating organisations suffered major or catastrophic loss during the study periods. Nor were
there any fatal injuries, prosecutions or significant civil claims, all of, which could have increased the levels of loss
well beyond those recorded.
Business Total Loss Annualised Loss Representing
Construction £245 075 £700 000 8.5% of tender price
Creamery £243 834 £975 336 1.4% of operating costs
Transport £48 928 £195 712 1.8% of operating costs

company 37% of profits
Oil Platform £940 921 £3 763 684 14.2% of potential output
Hospital £99 285 £397 140 5% of annual running costs

Note: Figures quoted are actual at time of study: no adjustment has been made for inflation.
65
Case Study 1 - Construction
CASE STUDY
Case Study 1
Construction Site
66
Case Study 1: Construction Site

Project details:
• An £8 million construction project building a new supermarket.
• The duration of the study covered the range of construction processes from groundworks to roofing.
• The main contractor was a wholly owned subsidiary of an international building and civil engineering
company.
• Labour was provided primarily through 29 sub-contractors. A project manager was assigned to the site,
along with two assistant site managers. Engineers were employed from an agency.
Threshold Value All accidents, which met the accident definition, were above a threshold value
of £5, and were considered by the main contractor to be preventable, were
recorded for the whole site.
Accident Profile Costs Incurred £

Total Accidents 3 626 Financial Costs 87 507
Major Injuries 0 Opportunity Costs 157 568
Over 3 days 0 Total Costs 245 075
Minor Injury 56 Annualised Loss 700 000
No injury 3 570 Losses expressed as:
8.5% of tender price
66
Case Study 3 - Transport
CASE STUDY
Case Study 3
Transport Company
67
Case Study 3: Transport Company

Business details:
Part of the same organisation that owned the creamery, although separately managed.
The company operated a fleet of milk tankers on behalf of the Milk Marketing Board collecting milk from
farms and delivered it to the creamery for processing.
Finished product was also delivered from the creamery to the regional distribution centres of major
supermarkets throughout the UK.
65 vehicles were based at the site and a further 80 refrigerated vehicles based elsewhere.
The company employed 80 staff, including a maintenance department responsible for servicing both vehicle
fleets.
Threshold Value Accidents which cost less than £5 or 15 minutes lost time were not recorded.

Total Accidents 296 Financial Costs 16 215
No injury 296 Losses expressed as:
37% of annualized profit.

1.8% of operating costs.
67
Case Study 5 – Hospital
CASE STUDY
Case Study 5
NHS Hospital
68
Case Study 5: NHS Hospital

Business details:
• The hospital employed about 700 people and belonged to a large metropolitan Health Board. The hospital
had 367 beds, seven care of the elderly wards, a plastic and oral surgery unit, and an annual budget of £8m.
• Following the Government's reforms of the National Health Service (NHS), the management structure of
the hospital was in the process of being changed at the time of the study. The hospital was striving to
deliver a higher quality service and to shorten waiting lists, as part of a general initiative within the NHS.
• There was reluctance amongst some medical staff to participate fully in the study. This may have resulted
in an under reporting of incidents
Threshold Value Not defined

Total Accidents 1232 Financial Costs 48 000
No injury 1 162 Losses expressed as:
5% of annual running costs
68
Exercise – Incident costing
Calculate the cost of the accident
EXERCISE
• Tripping incident
Incident costing
• 3 months off work
• 1 Month on light duties
What would this have cost your company?
69
Exercise – Incident costing
The Facts
A member of staff trips over a box and breaks an ankle resulting in 3 months off work
The employee returns to work – on light duties for 1 month
Estimated Costs
Using the table below, complete the approximate costs of the accident based on the average wage in your own
company.
Item Description Cost

Immediate costs at time of incident (First Aid, hospital, downtime of
staff involved
Downtime for Manager /HR / Investigation / Recruitment
Sick pay for injured person (3 months)
Overtime / replacement staff (agency)
Occupational health costs / Medical reports for return to work
Legal expenses following possible prosecution – and any civil claim
Insurance excess
Increase in insurance premium
Total
69
Insurance
• Employer’s Liability Insurance
INFORMATION
• Public Liability Insurance
• Ogden Rate Changes Insurance types
70
Insurance types
It is important to understand that whilst insurance is in place, it may not cover a number of areas that you may
have thought it would. Insurance will not pay the costs of criminal fines and thus whilst you thought you were
safe, you could in fact be exposed in a number of areas for failing to manage Health and Safety risks.
Employer’s Liability Insurance

Employer’s Liability Insurance covers civil claims made by employees and it is a statutory requirement for
employers to have £5 million pound of coverage under the Employers Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969.
There is a maximum penalty of up to £2500 for every day without appropriate cover.
Public Liability Insurance

Public Liability covers claims made by members of the public/third parties and there is no legal requirement to
have this insurance, but it is obviously recommended.
Ogden Rate Changes

This is effectively a discount rate that affects the amount of compensation a person receives during a personal
injury claim. The theory behind this is that if a person receives a large sum of money then in theory they can gain
interest over a period of time thus increasing their final figure. Therefore, this is taken into account when the
compensation is awarded to ensure a person is never under-or-over-compensated.
As of 2017, the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) announced that the Ogden rate would be reduced and therefore
insurance companies are going to have to increase their premiums to cover the costs, however these costs are
likely to be passed onto consumers. Therefore the market will see a huge increase motor insurance policies and
this is likely to also affect employers and public liability insurance policies too.
70
Insurance – recent increases
• Increase in employers premiums
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Increase in claims
Improved medical diagnosis
Increased awareness and readiness to claim
Insurance – Recent Increases
• Increased settlements
• £1 premium income v £1.47 paid out in claims
71
Insurance – Increases
Increases
There has been on average a two-thirds increase in employers liability premiums (in real terms) over the past
decade and a doubling of claims in the past five years. Despite this, insurers have not profited from employers
liability for several years. The reasons are mainly to do with compensation claims for long term health damage,
such as occupational deafness and respiratory disease. The latency period for such disabilities can be as long as
thirty years or more. Insurance premiums were traditionally based on claims experience and the premiums set
thirty years ago failed to anticipate:
• Improved medical diagnosis relating to diseases from work activity.

• Increased public awareness and readiness to claim compensation for loss.
• Increased settlements to reflect the true losses suffered.
A recent paper by the Association of British Insurers (ABI), lobbying for reform of systems of workplace
compensation asserted that recent legal changes, notably the “no win no fee” approach to legal charges and
reductions in the discount rate have increased the total cost of claims by 40% with defendants legal fees now
accounting for 40% of the total costs of claims. For every £1 of premium income in the last three years insurers
have paid out £1.47 in claims. It is little surprise therefore that insurers are now taking far more interest in risk
management and particularly in the control of long term health hazards.
Many employers believe that most incident costs are covered by insurance. The reality is usually the opposite as
Insurance policies don't cover everything. They may only pay for serious injuries or damage, or the policy excess
may be greater than the individual amounts concerned. All other costs will have to be met by you. Many injury
and ill-health costs are not covered by insurance.
They can include:

Lost time. Sick pay.
Damage or loss of product and raw materials. Repairs to plant and equipment.
Extra wages, overtime working and temporary labour. Production delays.
Investigation time. Fines.
Loss of contracts. Legal costs.
Loss of business reputation. Low staff morale.
Uninsured costs vary between businesses and types of incident. They are, however, several times more than the
insured costs. They can be likened to an iceberg. The costs recoverable through insurance are visible. But hidden
beneath the surface are the uninsured costs. Like an iceberg, most of the costs are not immediately visible.
71
Claim culture
No win, no fee
INFORMATION
• Dangle the carrot in front of you, you have nothing to lose
Claim culture
72
Claim culture
Conditional Fee Agreements (CFA)’s

CFA’s essentially drive “no win no fee” and became widely used as a method to ensure that everyone could access
compensation without the fear of paying up front solicitors fees (which can be very expensive) after the
introduction of the Access of Justice Act 1999. Quite often though, these CFA’s have encouraged a ‘dangle the
carrot’ scenario whereby claimants are now not off-put by any type of claim, even if it seems preposterous. The
system that was supposed to help society has been used for a purpose it was never intended.
In the past, ailments such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) were not recognised as a genuine condition
and as such this recent change has also contributed to the increase in claims.
In the past certain members of the public (and even the emergency services) appeared to be unwilling to
intervene in certain scenarios due to a fear of being involved in litigation for negligence on their behalf. So much
so, the UK Government introduced the Social Action, Responsibility and Heroism Act (SARAH) 2015 in order to
attempt to ensure that those who are acting heroically (emergency services personnel and members of the public)
have some form of protection and can intervene in a life or death situation without fear of reprisal.
72
H&S management cost v benefits
Benefits
INFORMATION
 Improved productivity and efficiency
 Less staff absence
 Less staff turnover
Costs and benefits of management
Costs
 Introduction – Developing a positive H&S culture
 Implementation – Introducing controls
 Maintaining a H&S Management System
73
The costs and benefits of health and safety management

Investment pay back
Many companies find improving workplace standards provides a financial benefit to the company. Investments
are repaid by, for example:
• Improved productivity and efficiency.

• Less staff absence.
• Less staff turnover.
Tackling the causes of accidental losses is not an unnecessary overhead but an investment in your business. Cost-
effective investment in health and safety is as valuable as any other investment in your company. A combination
of reducing accident costs and prevention costs can lead to dramatic savings in your company's bottom line.
IOSH Life savings campaign demonstrates to organisations that good health and safety management is not just
stopping people from becoming killed, injured or ill at work, there are equally other benefits from Health and
Safety.
For more than 20 years, many industrialists and leading health and safety professionals have argued that high
health and safety standards can help to reduce an organisation's costs. This argument has not secured universal
acceptance because its validity in actuarial terms has not been conclusively demonstrated, as the exact extent of
preventable loss has not been identified.
Quality managers often say “quality is free” – provided you are willing to make the investments that will let you
reap the rewards. The same is true for health and safety management. There are, of course, going to be
significant costs involved in introducing, implementing and maintaining a health and safety management system.
Historically managers have tended to focus on these easily identifiable costs, regarding them as a drain on their
budgets. How then can we justify the expenditure?
73
Module 2 - Plan
The importance of
INFORMATION
•
•
Health and Safety policy
Managing risks
Module 2 - Plan
• Emergency planning
• Ensuring competence
• Employee consultation and involvement
74
Module 2 – Plan
The importance of
• Health and Safety policy
• Managing risks
• Emergency planning
• Ensuring competence
• Employee consultation and involvement
Learning objectives:
• What are the core elements of managing for health and safety
• How the safety and health policy should reflect the current priorities, plans and targets of the organisation
74
Safety Management Systems
• Plan – Do – Check – Act
INFORMATION
•
•
•
"Managing for health and safety" HSG 65 (HSE)
ISO 45001 international standard (Replaced OHSAS 18001)
Principles are similar
Safety management systems
75
Safety management systems

Plan, Do, Check, Act
Management can be considered to be the process of planning, organising, leading and controlling the efforts of
organisation members and of using all other organisational resources to achieve stated organisational goals. Most
management systems are based on the Plan, Do, Check, Act model.
You may already be familiar with various management models used in your own organisation. For example,
Quality Management systems, such as ISO 9000 series and ISO 14000 series for environmental management, or
Investors in People (IIP) for staff training and development.
In health and safety there is guidance aimed at directors, owners, line managers and those with health and safety
responsibilities to put in place or oversee their organisation's health and safety arrangements. This guidance is
found in one of HSE's most popular guides "Managing for health and safety" (HSG65) which can be found here
https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/hsg65.htm
The guidance explains the Plan, Do, Check, Act approach and shows how it can help you achieve a balance
between the systems and behavioural aspects of management. It also treats health and safety management as an
integral part of good management generally, rather than as a stand-alone system.
ISO 45001
For organisations who wish to develop an accredited Occupational Health and Safety Management System there
is now an international standard called ISO 45001. This standard replaced BS OHSAS 18001 and also follows the
Plan, Do, Check, Act model although greater emphasis is placed stronger leadership, better worker involvement
and a focus on health, particularly mental health.
75
Plan
• Where you are now and where you need to be
INFORMATION
•
•
•
What do you want to achieve
How will you organise and define responsibilities
Who will you collaborate with
Plan
• How will you ensure you meet your legal requirements
• How you will measure performance
76
Plan
Direction
To implement your health and safety policy, you need to establish and maintain an effective health and safety
management system that is proportionate to the risks. You should set the direction for effective health and safety
management, and a policy that sets a clear direction will help to ensure communication of health and safety duties
and benefits throughout the organisation. Policies should be designed to meet legal requirements, prevent health
and safety problems, and enable you to respond quickly where difficulties arise or new risks are introduced. The
Plan part can be summarised as follows:
• Think about where you are now and where you need to be
• Say what you want to achieve
• Decide how you will measure performance
• Organise and define responsibilities
• Consider fire and other emergencies.
• Co-operate with anyone who shares your workplace
• Plan for changes and identify any specific legal requirements that apply to you.
Your plan will be captured in your health and safety policy. This will form the basis of your health and safety
management system
76
Exercise – A moment of reflection
Are you doing what you need to do to manage for health and
EXERCISE
A moment of reflection
safety effectively?
77
Are you doing what you need to do to manage for health and safety effectively?
Consider the following:
1. What are the strengths and weaknesses of your organisation’s health and safety performance?
2. What are the any barriers to change?
3. If your organisation is getting risk control right, why is that?
4. If there are problems, what are the underlying reasons, e.g. competence, resources, accountability, lack of
engagement with the workforce?
5. Have you learned from situations where things have gone wrong?
6. How reliable and sustainable for the future are the measures currently in place?
77
Health and safety policy
• Legal requirement for over 5 employees
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Must be communicated to all employees
Reviewed annually to check suitability
Provide direction and focus
• Legally Required under S2(3) HASAWA
78
Important
An important part of achieving effective health and safety outcomes is having a strategy and making clear plans.
You need to think about what you are going to do to manage health and safety, then decide who is going to do
what and how. This is your health and safety policy.
Legal requirement
If your organisation has five or more employees, that policy must be written down. HASAWA (Section 2(3)) states:
“It shall be the duty of every employer to prepare and as often as may be appropriate revise a written statement of
his general policy with respect to the health and safety at work of his employees and the organisation and
arrangements for the time being in force for carrying out that policy, and to bring the statement and any revision
of it to the notice of all of his employees”.
An effective health and safety policy will demonstrate the organisation's genuine intention to comply with the
spirit as well as the letter of the law. It sets a clear direction for the organisation to follow and should be shared
throughout the workforce, so that everyone understands how health and safety will be managed.
A health and safety policy should influence all workplace activities, including the selection of people, equipment
and materials, the way the work is done and how goods and services are designed.
A policy best written by someone within the organisation as it needs to reflect the organisation’s values and
beliefs; and commitment to provide a safe and healthy environment. However it is important that your policy
captures all relevant information hence you may choose to engage external support.
It should be written in consultation with the workforce, and should be signed by a person at the top of the
organisation – the owner or a director. You should make sure your actions, and those of your workers, mirror the
statements you have made.
78
H&S policy statement
• Commitment to Health and Safety
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Signed by Senior Management
Commitment to Continuous Improvement
Reference to consultation
• Reference to sources of expert advice
79

The policy statement is intended to communicate to all employees the importance of, and the commitment to
health and safety. The 'statement' should bear the signature of the owner, managing director, chief executive or
other 'most senior person' to give weight to the commitment being shown.
The better forms of statements of intent contain entries such as the following:
• Clear declarations of the organisation's intention to provide safe and healthy working conditions and to work
activities conducted safely so as not to harm others (the public, contractors etc) or the environment.
• Commitments to continuous improvement in health and safety performance to meet all relevant laws and
regulations.
• Declarations that the preservation and development of physical and human resources is central to the
organisation's mission.
• References to the consultation facilities that exist, including the need to consult individual employees before
giving them specific health and safety responsibilities.
• References to sources of expert advice regarding health and safety. Regulation 7 of the Management
Regulations requires employers to appoint one or more competent persons to assist in health and safety
matters.
• Commitments to the provision of relevant information and training in respect of health and safety as well as to
providing appropriate funds for health and safety.
• Reference to the support demanded from all persons in the firm in order to achieve the safety objectives.
Examples
In order to clearly demonstrate this commitment, it is helpful to state some underlying beliefs such as
• “Continuous improvement in health and safety performance is the responsibility of all employees”.
• "Good health and safety performance is of equal importance as productivity and quality”.
• "People are our most valuable asset".
• “Safety is everyone’s business”.
Important: It must be emphasised that a policy statement can achieve nothing unless the words are translated
into deeds.
79
Organisation & responsibilities
• Top to bottom
INFORMATION
•
•
Ultimate accountability
Job title duties and responsibilities Organisation & responsibilities
• Specific responsibilities
• Organogram
80
Organisation & responsibilities
Structure
This section of the policy contains information about your organisation and responsibilities for health and safety.
The section should also show details of how you are organised to deliver your plan and sets out the responsibilities
of key job titles from top to bottom.
The ultimate accountability for health and safety rests with the highest level of management. However, it is the
responsibility of everyone in the organisation to co-operate in providing and maintaining a safe working
environment.
It is important to understand the structure for health and safety management, as this may be different to our
overall business structure. An organisation chart is one way to show how the relationships between the different
positions operates. This helps to clarify areas of responsibility and lines of communication.
Each job title will include a summary of key health and safety responsibilities. For example
• The Board of directors have overall accountability for health and safety at the Club
• The CEO or MD shall ensure appropriate resources are made available
• Divisional directors shall ensure health and safety risks are monitored and managed
• Managers will conduct risk assessments and undertake accident investigations
• The Health and Safety Manager shall provide competent advice
• All employees shall be responsible for acting in a safe manner whilst at work
Responsibilities of other key postholders such as First aiders and Fire wardens should also appear.
80
Policy - Arrangements
How the policy is to be implemented
INFORMATION
• Regulation 5 of the Management Regulations 1999 requires
appropriate arrangements
• Record made
Covering
• Hazards
• Identification
• Consulting
• Investigation
81
Layout
This is likely to be a lengthy document or more likely a manual of procedures, which identify how responsibilities
are to be carried out. As already mentioned, following on from the reference in HASAWA, the Management
Regulations are a little more specific about what the arrangements should contain. Regulation 5 states:
a) Every employer shall make and give effect to such arrangements as are appropriate, having regard to the nature
of his activities and the size of his undertaking, for the effective planning, organisation, control, monitoring and
review of the preventive and protective measures.
b) Where the employer employs five or more employees, he shall record the arrangements referred to in
paragraph (a).
The arrangements therefore should include not only the technical operating procedures but also the way in which
health and safety is to be managed. At the minimum they should cover:
• The procedures for identifying hazards and for assessing and dealing with all manner of risks to health and
safety.
• The procedures for identifying in advance the risks and precautions involved in site building operations
including work involving contractors.
• Methods of consultation with employees or their representatives.
• Accident reporting and investigation.
• Provision and use of personal protective equipment.
• Procedures for introducing new machinery, substances or processes.
81
Risk profiling
A risk profile examines:
INFORMATION
• the nature and level of the threats faced by an organisation;
• the likelihood of adverse effects occurring;
Risk profiling
• the level of disruption and costs associated with each type of
risk;
• the effectiveness of controls in place to manage those risks.
82
Risk profiling
The risk profile of an organisation informs all aspects of the approach to leading and managing its health and
safety risks. Every organisation will have its own risk profile.
This is the starting point for determining the greatest health and safety issues for the organisation.
In some businesses the risks will be tangible and immediate safety hazards, whereas in other organisations the
risks may be health-related and it may be a long time before the illness becomes apparent.
A risk profile examines:

• the nature and level of the threats faced by an organisation;
• the likelihood of adverse effects occurring;
• the level of disruption and costs associated with each type of risk;
• the effectiveness of controls in place to manage those risks.
The outcome of risk profiling will be that the right risks have been identified and prioritised for action, and minor
risks will not have been given too much priority. It also informs decisions about what risk control measures are
needed.
82
Risk assessment and control
Risk assessment is the cornerstone of modern H&S management
INFORMATION
“Those who create the risks should have the responsibility for
overcoming those risks”.
Lord Roben
83

Risk prioritisation
Effective leaders and line managers know the risks their organisations face, rank them in order of importance and
take action to control them.
The range of risks goes beyond health and safety risks to include quality, environmental and asset damage, but
issues in one area could impact in another. For example, unsafe forklift truck driving may have a service or quality
dimension as a result of damage to goods. A risk profile examines the nature and levels of threats faced by an
organisation. It examines the likelihood of adverse effects occurring, the level of disruption and costs associated
with each type of risk and the effectiveness of the control measures in place.
Although you may not use these precise terms, you will most likely have built a risk profile that covers:
• the nature and level of the risks faced by your organisation;
• the likelihood of adverse effects occurring and the level of disruption;
• costs associated with each type of risk;
• effectiveness of the controls in place to manage those risks.
Cornerstone
In the health and safety arena risk assessment is the cornerstone of modern health and safety management. This
dates back to one of the basic principles stated in the Robens Report, which led to the creation of the HASAWA:
“Those who create the risks should have the responsibility for overcoming those risks”.
Risk assessment is therefore the process of establishing whether or not risks are adequately managed.
83
Key definitions
Hazard - something that has the potential to cause harm
INFORMATION
Hazardous event – interaction with the hazard
Likelihood - The likelihood of potential harm being realised
Consequence – the undesirable outcome (human suffering)
Key definitions
Risk – a combination of the likelihood of potential harm from
that hazard being realised and the expected outcome
84
Key definitions
There are some key terms to understand before we consider the process of conducting a risk assessment
Hazard
Can be defined as something that has the potential to cause harm and examples of this are articles, substances,
plant or machines, methods of work, the working environment and other aspects of work organisation.
Hazardous Event
A hazard on its own is not going to cause harm, thus a hazardous event must take place.
Risk
The likelihood of potential harm from that hazard being realised, which will depend on likelihood multiplied by the
consequence.
Take the example of a hungry lion, there is nothing currently in place between the lion and yourself. Therefore
the categorisation of the lion eating you in terms of being a hazard is high. As there is nothing in place to prevent
this, the likelihood of this occurring is also high. The consequence naturally could be death.
However, if the lion is placed behind bars (the control measure), the categorisation of the lion as a hazard is still
high as it is still present, but the likelihood of this occurring is now reduced to low.
Electricity is another example of a high hazard, however due to the number of control measures that are in place,
the likelihood should hopefully be low.
84
Assessing the risks
1. Identify the Hazards
INFORMATION
2. Decide who might be harmed – and how
3. Evaluate the Risk
4. Record the Significant Findings
Assessing the risks
5. Review the findings
85
Assessing the risks

5 Steps to Risk Assessment
Risk Assessment as described in the HSE’s “5 Steps to Risk Assessment” INDG 163 involves the following steps:
1. Identify the Hazards
One of the most important aspects of your risk assessment is accurately identifying the potential hazards in your
workplace. A good starting point is to walk around your workplace and think about any hazards. In other words,
what is it about the activities, processes or substances used that could injure your employees or harm their
health? There are some hazards with a recognised risk of harm, for example working at height, working with
chemicals, machinery, and asbestos.
2. Decide who might be harmed – and how.

Think how employees (or others who may be present such as contractors or visitors) might be harmed. Ask your
employees what they think the hazards are, as they may notice things that are not obvious to you and may have
some good ideas on how to control the risks. For each hazard you need to be clear about who might be harmed; it
will help you identify the best way of controlling the risk.
3. Evaluate the Risks

Having identified the hazards, you then have to decide how likely it is that harm will occur; i.e. the level of risk and
what to do about it. Risk is a part of everyday life and you are not expected to eliminate all risks. Generally, you
need to do everything 'reasonably practicable'. This means balancing the level of risk against the measures needed
to control the real risk in terms of money, time or trouble. Your risk assessment should only include what you
could reasonably be expected to know - you are not expected to anticipate unforeseeable risks.
4. Record the significant findings

Make a record of your significant findings - the hazards, how people might be harmed by them and what you have
in place to control the risks. Any record produced should be simple and focused on controls.
5. Review the Risk Assessment and update if necessary

Few workplaces stay the same. Sooner or later, you will bring in new equipment, substances and procedures that
could lead to new hazards. So it makes sense to review what you are doing on an ongoing basis, look at your risk
assessment again and ask yourself:
• Have there been any significant changes?
• Are there improvements you still need to make?
• Have your workers spotted a problem?
• Have you learnt anything from accidents or near misses?
• Make sure your risk assessment stays up to date.
85
Controlling risk
The aim is to:
INFORMATION
• do everything that is reasonably practicable; and
• apply the general principles of prevention hierarchy Controlling risk
Elimination
Substitution
Engineering Controls
Administrative Controls
PPE
86
Controlling risk
Having identified the risk you now need to decide on the control measures you are going to put in place. And to
help you with this process you should apply the approach set out in the general principles of prevention hierarchy
of control that appears in Schedule 1 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999. It sets
out an order of priority as follows::
Elimination
Eliminating the hazard—physically removing it—is the most effective hazard control. For example, if employees
must work high above the ground, the hazard can be eliminated by moving the piece they are working on to
ground level to eliminate the need to work at heights.
Substitution
If a pesticide contains DDT, an effective substitution would be to replace it with a green pesticide.
Substitution, the second most effective hazard control, involves replacing something that produces a hazard
(similar to elimination) with something that does not produce a hazard—for example, replacing lead-based paint
with acrylic paint. To be an effective control, the new product must not produce another hazard. Because airborne
dust can be hazardous, if a product can be purchased with a larger particle size, the smaller product may
effectively be substituted with the larger product.
Engineering controls
The third most effective means of controlling hazards is engineered controls. These do not eliminate hazards, but
rather isolate people from hazards. Capital costs of engineered controls tend to be higher than less effective
controls in the hierarchy, however they may reduce future costs. For example, a crew might build a work platform
rather than purchase, replace, and maintain fall arrest equipment. "Enclosure and isolation" creates a physical
barrier between personnel and hazards, such as using remotely controlled equipment. Fume hoods can remove
airborne contaminants as a means of engineered control.
Administrative controls
Administrative controls are changes to the way people work. Examples of administrative controls include
procedure changes, employee training, and installation of signs and warning labels . Administrative controls do not
remove hazards, but limit or prevent people's exposure to the hazards, such as completing road construction at
night when fewer people are driving.
Personal protective equipment

Personal protective equipment (PPE) includes gloves, respirators, hard hats, safety glasses, high-visibility clothing,
and safety footwear. PPE is the least effective means of controlling hazards because of the high potential for
damage to render PPE ineffective.. Additionally, some PPE, such as respirators, increase physiological effort to
complete a task and, therefore, may require medical examinations to ensure workers can use the PPE without
risking their health.
86
Case Study – Hugo Boss
Hugo Boss – Retail Store
CASE STUDY
• Unsecured mirror
• 4 year old boy is killed
• Previous Incidents
Hugo Boss
• Fined £1.2 Million – under section 3
• Costs of £47k
• (Foreseeable)
87
Case Study – Hugo Boss
Hugo Boss
Hugo Boss was fined £1.2m after a four-year-old boy died at one its shops.
Austen Healey was killed by an 18-stone (114kg) changing room mirror, which fell on him at the Hugo Boss outlet
in Bicester Village in 2013.
He was rushed to the John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, where he underwent an emergency operation to relieve
pressure on his brain but died four days later in hospital after his life-support machine was switched off.
Hugo Boss admitted to health and safety breaches at a hearing at Banbury Magistrates’ Court on 2 June for failing
to secure mirror. Jonathan Laidlaw QC, defending, entered a guilty plea for the company to offences under
HASAWA and the Management Regulations. However, Barry Berlin, prosecuting on behalf of Cherwell District
Council, told the court that the label should be sentenced at the crown court because the maximum fine at
magistrates’ court was only £20,000. He suggested the case should be sentenced in the crown court where the
recommended starting point of a £100,000 fine per offence could be imposed or even exceeded.
“Plainly this a very serious matter relating to a child aged four-and-a-half who on June 4 2013 was struck on the
head by a seven feet tall, 18 stone free standing three-way mirror,” he added. “It wasn’t fixed to the wall despite
its own requirements. We say, bearing in mind that the injuries the child sustained resulted in his death, that this
is a case that should be dealt with in the crown court.”
An inquest concluded the mirror should have been fixed to a wall, while coroner Darren Salter described the
incident as “an accident waiting to happen”.
In sentencing the company today (4 Sep), Oxford Crown Court Judge Peter Ross said Hugo Boss had a “corporate
responsibility”, and he wanted to ensure the issue went to the “very top of the company”. He said it “would have
been obvious to the untrained eye” that the mirror posed a risk, adding that it was “nothing short of a miracle”
that it had not happened sooner.
The prosecutor said that the company’s ‘system plainly broke down seriously’ when it came to mirrors – with glass
panels also known to have fallen on two occasions at a Hugo Boss shop in Carnaby Street, London. He described
the accident as ‘entirely foreseeable’ and said that this was ‘a systemic failure’.
Mr Laidlaw said the company has settled a civil claim with Austen’s family.
87
Summary of legal requirements
Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999
INFORMATION
Risk assessment – Regulation 3
• suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks
Principles of prevention to be applied – Regulation 4
• Implement protective measures as specified in Schedule 1
Schedule 1
• The general principles of prevention (control hierarchy)
88

The requirement to conduct risk assessments is captured in the Management of Health and Safety at Work
Regulations 1999 which says:
Risk assessment
3.—(1) Every employer shall make a suitable and sufficient assessment of—
(a)the risks to the health and safety of his employees to which they are exposed whilst they are at work; and
(b)the risks to the health and safety of persons not in his employment arising out of or in connection with the
conduct by him of his undertaking,
for the purpose of identifying the measures he needs to take to comply with the requirements and prohibitions
imposed upon him by or under the relevant statutory provisions and by Part II of the Fire Precautions (Workplace)
Regulations 1997.
(2) Every self-employed person shall make a suitable and sufficient assessment of—
(a)the risks to his own health and safety to which he is exposed whilst he is at work; and
(b)the risks to the health and safety of persons not in his employment arising out of or in connection with the
conduct by him of his undertaking,
Principles of prevention to be applied

4. Where an employer implements any preventive and protective measures he shall do so on the basis of the
principles specified in Schedule 1 to these Regulations.
Schedule 1 General principles of prevention

(This Schedule specifies the general principles of prevention set out in Article 6(2) of Council
Directive 89/391/EEC)(1)
(a)avoiding risks;
(b)evaluating the risks which cannot be avoided;
(c)combating the risks at source;
(d)adapting the work to the individual, especially as regards the design of workplaces, the choice of work
equipment and the choice of working and production methods, with a view, in particular, to alleviating
monotonous work and work at a predetermined work-rate and to reducing their effect on health;
(e)adapting to technical progress;
(f)replacing the dangerous by the non-dangerous or the less dangerous;
(g)developing a coherent overall prevention policy which covers technology, organisation of work, working
conditions, social relationships and the influence of factors relating to the working environment;
(h)giving collective protective measures priority over individual protective measures; and
(i)giving appropriate instructions to employees
88
Sensible risk management
What it is…. What it is NOT…
INFORMATION
Sensible risk management
 Ensuring workers and public X Creating a totally risk free society
are protected X Generating useless paperwork
 Providing overall benefit by mountains
balancing benefits and risks, with X Scaring people by exaggerating or
a focus on reducing real risks publicising trivial risks
 Enabling innovation and X Stopping important recreational
learning not stifling them and learning activities for individuals
 Ensuring that those who create where the risks are managed
risks manage them responsibly X Reducing protection of people from
 Enabling individuals to risks that cause real harm and
understand they have a right of suffering
protection and responsibility
89
Sensible Risk Management
HSE message
Despite the stories you hear, the HSE is about saving lives, not stopping people living. The HSE are trying to make
sure attention is on the issues that really matter.
Risk management should be about practical steps to protect people from real harm and suffering - not
bureaucratic back covering. If you believe some of the stories you hear, health and safety is all about stopping any
activity that might possibly lead to harm. This is not the HSE’s vision of sensible health and safety - they want to
save lives, not stop them. Their approach is to seek a balance between the unachievable aim of absolute safety
and the kind of poor management of risk that damages lives and the economy.
Sensible risk management is about:

• Ensuring that workers and the public are properly protected
• Providing overall benefit to society by balancing benefits and risks, with a focus on reducing real risks – both
those which arise more often and those with serious consequences.
• Enabling innovation and learning not stifling them
• Ensuring that those who create risks manage them responsibly and understand that failure to manage real
risks responsibly is likely to lead to robust action
• Enabling individuals to understand that as well as the right to protection, they also have to exercise
responsibility
Sensible risk management is not about:

• Creating a totally risk free society
• Generating useless paperwork mountains
• Scaring people by exaggerating or publicising trivial risks
• Stopping important recreational and learning activities for individuals where the risks are managed
• Reducing protection of people from risks that cause real harm and suffering
The principles were launched by Bill Callaghan, Chair of the Health and Safety Commission in August 2006.
89
Emergency planning
• Do you have a plan in place?
INFORMATION
• Does that plan work?
• Who would implement in your absence? Emergency planning
90
Emergency planning
Emergency plans
All sorts of organisations (such as schools, hospitals, county councils, major industries such as chemical plants, oil
platforms and large manufacturing plants) have emergency planning at the core of what they do. The Civil
Contingencies Act 2004 was introduced to ensure that all organisations have effective, well-practiced emergency
plans in place. Therefore, it is important that all organisations have plans in place to management emergencies
and to prevent disruption to its operation.
Emergency Planning is that important to the National Infrastructure, there is even an Emergency Planning College
that sits under the Civil Contingencies Secretariat providing a number of useful areas of information in which to
base an emergency plan.
Some organisation have whole departments specifically responsible for the organisations resilience to
emergencies.
An emergency plan can be as simple as a map that tells everyone where the isolation points are for gas, electricity
and water to strategic planning such as that of the Government Cobra committee which often meets to discuss
emergency planning.
Clearly there are varying levels of emergency planning dependent on the type of organisation, its size, number of
locations and its strategic importance to the countries operation. Nevertheless, it is essential for all organisations
to ensure that plans are in place to be able to effectively deal with emergencies before they happen. It is also
good practice to ensure that everyone is aware of procedures, this ensures responsibility flows throughout the
organisation and does not just rest with one person.
Further information can be found within the Home Office: Recovery - An Emergency Management Guide.
90
Competence
Do all individuals have the necessary competence to carry out
INFORMATION
Competence
their role?
• Responsibilities
• Appropriate training
• Competent person
• Selection
• Source of competent advice
91
Competence
‘Truly effective health and safety management requires competency across every facet of an organisation and
through every level of the workforce.’
Competence is the ability to undertake responsibilities and perform activities to a recognised standard on a
regular basis. It combines practical and thinking skills, knowledge and experience.
The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 require an employer to appoint one or more
competent people to help them implement the measures they need to take to comply with the legal
requirements. That could be a member of the workforce, the owner/manager, or an external consultant.
The competent person should focus on the significant risks and those with serious consequences. The competence
of individuals is vital, whether they are employers, managers, supervisors, employees or contractors, especially
those with safety-critical roles (such as plant maintenance engineers). It ensures they recognise the risks in their
activities and can apply the right measures to control and manage those risks.
Source: Managing for health and safety (HSG65) HSE publications
91
Employee consultation
Employers must consult with employees or their representatives
INFORMATION
consulted and involve them in health and safety matters
• Legal duty to consult

• New measures
• Inform, train and instruct
92
Duty to consult
Employers have a duty to consult with their employees, or their representatives, on health and safety matters.
This leaflet is aimed at employers and discusses what they need to do to ensure they are complying with the
law.
The law sets out how employees must be consulted in different situations and the different choices employers
have to make. There are two different regulations that require employers to consult their workforce about health
and safety:
• The Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations 1977 (as amended); and
• The Health and Safety (Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 As amended).
These regulations will apply to most workplaces.
In workplaces where the employer recognises trade unions and trade unions are recognised for collective
bargaining purposes, the Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations 1977 (as amended) will
apply.
In workplaces where employees are not in a trade union and/or the employer does not recognise the trade union,
or the trade union does not represent those employees not in the trade union, the Health and Safety
(Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 (as amended) will apply.
What must I consult about?

You must consult with employees or their representatives about the following:
• The introduction of any measure which may substantially affect their health and safety at work, e.g. the
introduction of new equipment or new systems of work, such as the speed of a process line or shift-work
arrangements;
• Arrangements for getting competent people to help them comply with health and safety laws (a competent
person is someone who has the necessary knowledge, skills and experience to help an employer meet the
requirements of health and safety law);
• The information you must give your employees on the risks and dangers arising from their work, measures to
reduce or get rid of these risks and what employees should do if they are exposed to a risk;
• The planning and organisation of health and safety training; and
• The health and safety consequences of introducing new technology.
92
Objectives and targets
Specific
INFORMATION
Measurable
Achievable
Realistic
Timescale
93
Setting Objectives
Objectives and targets are tools for translating the organisations intention into action, providing a direction and
time-scale for driving the organisation forward.
If you are not working towards clearly defined targets and objectives, you have no way of knowing whether you
are making progress.
An objective is a general goal - an unquantified statement of intention.
A target allocates detailed performance requirements, and functions as a route marker on the way to achieving an
objective.
Targets should be SMART
Specific – In order to be specific, a person needs to ask themselves a number of questions and these can be in the
format of what, when, where, why, how. An example could be, why do we want to improve our accident rate?
Measurable – Objectives and targets need to be measurable in order to ascertain whether you are successfully or
not. Believing your accidents have reduced is not the same as knowing your accidents have reduced.
Achievable – Prior to setting out on this journey, it is wise to ensure that what it is you plan to achieve is
achievable in the first place. An example of a non achievable objective or target is to have no accidents in a
workplace, as human error is always likely to place its part.
Realistic – An objective/target setting needs to be realistic otherwise it is unlikely to receive buy in from others
within the team. An example could be trying to introduce an initiative from one organisation (which is in a
different sector) to reduce accidents, but the initiative is not going to work in your organisation.
Timescale – As time is a precious commodity for us all, there is no point in implementing any plans that either
have non existent or unreasonable timescales. Measuring a reduction in accidents should be done of a significant
period of time in which to view sufficient data.
Both short-and long-term objectives should be set and prioritised against business needs. Objectives at different
levels or within different parts of an organisation should be aligned so they support the overall policy objectives.
Personal targets can also be agreed with individuals to secure the attainment of objectives.
93
Setting performance standards
• Management Standards
INFORMATION
• Key Performance Indicators
• Benchmarking Setting performance standards
94
Setting performance standards

Performance standards are needed to identify the contribution that people make to operating the health and
safety management system.
Standards for people at all levels are needed to ensure:

• The effective design, development and installation of the health and safety management system.
• The consistent implementation and improvement of the health and safety management system, i.e. the
management arrangements, RCSs and workplace precautions, and that positive rewards can be provided for
individuals in recognition of the effort put into accident and ill health prevention.
• Performance standards are the foundation for a positive health and safety culture.
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

Key performance indicators for reviewing overall performance can include:
• Assessment of the degree of compliance with health and safety system requirements.
• Identification of areas where the health and safety system is absent or inadequate (those areas where further
action is necessary to develop the total health and safety management system).
• Assessment of the achievement of specific objectives and plans, and accident, ill health and incident data
accompanied by analysis of both the immediate and underlying causes, trends and common features.
These indicators are consistent with the development of a “positive health and safety culture”. They emphasise
achievement and success rather than merely measuring failure by looking only at accident data.
Benchmarking
• Organisations may also 'benchmark' their performance against other organisations by comparing:
• Accident rates with those organisations in the same industry, which use similar business.
• Processes and experience of similar risks.
• Management practices and techniques used within other organisations to provide a different perspective and
new insights on health and safety management within the safety management system.
94
Key actions
An organisation must plan to:
INFORMATION
• control risks;
• react to changing demands;
• sustain positive health and safety attitudes and behaviours.
Key actions
Effective leaders make a difference!
95
Key actions
Why planning is essential

Planning is essential for the implementation of health and safety policies. Adequate control of risk can only be
achieved through co-ordinated action by all members of the organisation. An effective system for health and
safety management requires organisations to plan to:
• control risks;
• react to changing demands;
• sustain positive health and safety attitudes and behaviours.
In addition to setting your policy, planning should include steps to ensure legal compliance and procedures for
dealing with emergency situations. It should involve people throughout the organisation.
95
Module 3 - Do
Implement your plan
Module 3
• Assess risks
• Provide the right tools and equipment
• Ensure competence and training
Do
• Effective communication
• Engage with the workforce
• Procuring standards
96
Module 3 - Do
Learning objectives
How to;
• Implement your plan

• Assess risks and decide on effective control measures
• Provide the right tools and equipment to do the job and keep them maintained
• Ensure everyone is competent and trained to carry out their work
• Supervise to make sure that arrangements are followed
• Be effective in your communication to the workforce
• Engaging the workforce in committing to promoting and achieving a healthy and safe workplace
• Procuring standards
96
Do
Biggest challenge of the process and involves:
INFORMATIION
•
•
Identify your risk profile and assess risks
Decide on the preventive and protective measures
Do
• Involve workers and communicate
• Provide adequate resources
• Train, supervise and instruct
• Gain competent advice
97
Do
This is the most challenging part of the system – doing what you say you are going to do!
Delivery depends on an effective management system to ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, the health and
safety of employees and other people affected by your work. Leaders must be committed to implementing the
policy that has been agreed and lead by example. This in turn will help generate a positive Safety Culture –
something that we will consider at the end of this module. Weak leadership and paying lip service to the plan will
not instil confidence amongst the workforce and ultimately the plan and the objectives you have set will not work.
Whilst leaders are ultimately accountable for health and safety within the business you can assign responsibility to
others to carry out particular duties. But you must ensure that risks are dealt with sensibly, responsibly and
proportionately by people who are trained and competent.
To ensure you implement your plan effectively you need to:

• Identify your risk profile and assess risks
• Decide on the preventive and protective measures needed and put them in place
• Involve workers and communicate, so that everyone is clear
• Provide adequate resources, including competent advice where needed
• Provide the right tools and equipment to do the job and keep them maintained
• Train and instruct, to ensure everyone is competent to carry out their work
• Supervise to make sure that arrangements are followed
97
Involving the workforce
• Co-operation
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Involvement
Open communication
Pooling knowledge and experience
Involving your workforce
• H&S becomes ‘everybody’s business’
98
Involving your workforce

Co-operation
Co-operation with and involving your workers beyond the required legal minimum standard (i.e. more than
consultation), allows you to develop a genuine management/ workforce partnership based on trust, respect and
co-operation.
With such a partnership in place, a culture can evolve in which health and safety problems are jointly solved and in
which concerns, ideas and solutions are freely shared and acted upon.
The effect of workforce involvement is that operational practices and health and safety risk management are
aligned for the benefit of all and with the co-operation of everyone (workers, their representatives and managers).
Successful organisations’ often go further than strictly required by law and actively encourage and support
consultation in different ways.
• Employees at all levels may become involved in a range of activities such as:
• Helping set performance standards.
• Devising operating systems, procedures and instructions for risk control.
• Monitoring and auditing.
• Participating in ad-hoc problem solving teams.
Ways of involving workers

Involving workers is key to integrating health and safety as part of everyday business rather than being seen as
something done by somebody else.
Organisations can find appropriate ways to involve their workers in managing health and safety. For smaller firms,
this may be simply:
• encouraging open communications (e.g. toolbox talks, suggestion schemes, notice boards, or health and safety
walkabouts) where workers can discuss or raise their concerns;
• giving recognition when workers identify risks.
For larger businesses, more formal health and safety forums or committees can be a means of enabling worker
involvement which may need to cater for part-time workers and contractors.
98
Health and safety committee
• Review :
INFORMATION
Health and Safety Committee
– action plans, statistics on accidents and ill health
– accident investigations and subsequent action
– Workplace inspections, risk assessments
• Health and safety training
• Emergency procedures
• Changes in the workplace affecting H&S
• Promote a positive health and safety culture
99
Health and safety committee
Legal duty
If two or more union-appointed health and safety representatives request in writing that you set up a health and
safety committee, you must do so within three months of the request.
Although there is no such requirement if you consult health and safety representatives elected by the workforce,
it is good practice to set up a health and safety committee where:
• you have several health and safety representatives elected by employees; or

• you have to consult both union-appointed health and safety representatives and employee-elected
representatives.
Planning
If you and your health and safety representatives want to set up a dedicated health and safety committee, it is
useful to agree together:
• the principles of how it will work best so that it is clear for all employees and members of the committee;
• who the members will be;
• how often the committee will meet;
• what the committee will do;
• how you will make decisions and deal with disagreements; and
• what resources representatives will need as committee members.
99
Exercise – Effective & ineffective
consultation EXERCISE
How effective is your worker consultation and involvement on
health and safety matters? Effective and ineffective consultation
Examples of:
• Effective consultation
• Poor consultation
100
Effective and ineffective consultation
Consultation can be effective or ineffective. The table below illustrates some good and poor practices. Do you
recognise any within your organisation?
100
Communication
• Effective communication
INFORMATION
• Organisation size and structure
Getting the:
Communication
 right message
 to the right people
 at the right time
• 6 Stages of communication
101
Communication
Effective communication
To achieve success in health and safety management, there needs to be effective communication up, down and
across the organisation. Organisations need to communicate information to their workers on the risk to their
health and safety identified in their risk assessments, and the preventive and protective measures necessary to
control risk. The information provided should be communicated appropriately, taking into account:
• workers’ levels of competence;
• the size and structure of the organisation.
How size and structure affect communication

A high-risk workplace, with a large unionised workforce spread over multiple sites, may have trade union
representatives from different sites as members of a formal health and safety committee that meets regularly,
and feeds into a corporate health and safety committee. A non-unionised, smaller workplace located on one small,
low-risk site, is more likely to consult directly with employees on a day-to-day basis (e.g. through toolbox talks, or
short safety briefings).
Successful communication
The art of successful communication is getting the right message to the right people at the right time.
With regard to the Safety Management System the organisation must have effective procedures for:
• Internal communication between the various levels and functions of the organisation (top down, bottom up,
and across functional lines).
• Receiving, documenting and responding to relevant communications from interested external parties (e.g.
stakeholders or enforcement agencies).
• In order for communication to be effective it is not sufficient simply to transmit a message in some way, it
must also be received and understood.
• One theory of communication (Shannon and Weaver) identifies six separate stages that must exist for
communication to be effective. At each stage, there may be barriers to communication. The barriers are
shown in Italics on the following page.
• Further information can be found within IOSH publication Getting the message? Guidance on communication.
101
Messages and barriers
• Conceiving the message
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Encoding the message
Selecting the medium
Decoding the message
• Interpreting the message
• Feedback
102
Conceiving the Message.

Consider the content of the message, what is the purpose i.e. what do you intend should happen as a result. The
message should be clear, concise, and accurate.
Barriers: The sender himself may not be clear. Irrelevant detail may disguise the intended message.
Information may be inaccurate or expressed in vague ambiguous terms.
Encoding the Message.

Always consider the receiver when choosing the most appropriate 'language'. The style, vocabulary, and manner
of presentation may convey as much as the message itself. Different vocabularies and styles will suit different
purposes, e.g. formal instructions, advice, requests, or simply information.
Barriers: If the wrong style is used, the wrong level of priority may be given. The wrong language or
vocabulary (jargon etc.) may result in misunderstanding.
Selecting the Medium.

Different messages require different mediums, e.g., oral direct or oral by telephone, written reports, memos,
pictures, and diagrams. The need for speed, confidentiality, a written record, the complexity of the message and
the number of receivers will all influence the choice of medium.
Barriers: The complexity of the message may be unsuited to some mediums (e.g. directions by telephone). The
volume of written communication may result in overload, important messages being overlooked. Oral
instructions may be unheard, or mis-heard due to physical barriers such as noise.
Decoding the Message.

The receiver decodes the message according to his/her own understanding of the vocabulary used.
Barriers: Non-specialists may misunderstand specialist jargon. A significant number of people at work cannot
read or have reading difficulties.
Interpreting the Message.

People are complex, they read between the lines and interpret messages (often incorrectly) according to:
Their relationship with the sender, Past experience of similar situations, Attitudes / culture.
Barriers: Poorly conceived messages that are ambiguous are likely to be misinterpreted. Wrong assumptions
may be made when instructions are not explicit. A classic example is the sign - "authorised persons only beyond
this point". Who is and is not authorised? Culture and past experience may create a perceived difference
between what is said and what is meant. Expectation - i.e. hearing what was expected, jumping to conclusions.
Feedback.
Unless the sender is provided with prompt, unambiguous feedback, communication errors cannot be corrected.
Feedback therefore, be it written, oral or visual (signals and body language) is an important form of
communication. Some mediums allow feedback more easily than others do. Notice boards for example are
unlikely to produce feedback (apart from graffiti!). Lack of feedback is in itself a barrier to communication.
102
Health surveillance
Health surveillance should also be introduced where:
INFORMATION
•
•
there is an identifiable disease
valid techniques are available to detect
Health surveillance
• the disease may occur in work
• surveillance will protect the employees
103
Health surveillance
Health checks
Health surveillance is a system of ongoing health checks. These health checks may be required by law for
employees who are exposed to noise or vibration, ionising radiation, solvents, fumes, dusts, biological agents and
other substances hazardous to health, or work in compressed air.
Health surveillance is important for:
• detecting ill-health effects at an early stage, so employers can introduce better controls to prevent them
getting worse
• providing data to help employers evaluate health risks
• enabling employees to raise concerns about how work affects their health
• highlighting lapses in workplace control measures, therefore providing invaluable feedback to the risk
assessment
• providing an opportunity to reinforce training and education of employees (e.g. on the impact of health effects
and the use of protective equipment)
Risk assessment
Your risk assessment should be used to identify any need for health surveillance. The risk assessment will identify
circumstances in which health surveillance is required by specific health and safety regulations, e.g. the Control of
Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 (COSHH). You should not use health surveillance as a substitute
for undertaking a risk assessment or using effective controls.
Health surveillance can sometimes be used to help identify where more needs to be done to control risks and
where early signs of work-related ill health are detected, employers should take action to prevent further harm
and protect employees.
The risk assessment

Health surveillance should also be introduced where the assessment shows all the following criteria apply:
• there is an identifiable disease or adverse health condition related to the work concerned;
• valid techniques are available to detect indications of the disease or condition;
• there is a reasonable likelihood that the disease or condition may occur under the particular conditions of the
work;
• surveillance is likely to help protect the health and safety of the employees to be covered.
When putting in place a health surveillance programme, avoid blanket coverage for all employees as it can provide
misleading results and waste money
103
Health & safety training
• Skills, knowledge and training
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Capabilities
Types of training
Information
Health and safety training
• Key actions
104
Health and safety training
What capabilities do employees need to have?

To comply with the law, employees need to have the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their duties
safely. Organisations should take into account their employees’ capabilities, to ensure the demands of the job do
not exceed their ability to do the work without risk to themselves or others.
Everyone in an organisation requires adequate health and safety training. Training helps people gain the skills and
knowledge, and ultimately the competence, to carry out their work safely and without risk to their health.
Training isn’t just about formal ‘classroom’ courses – it can be delivered in a number of ways, for example:
• informal, ‘on the job’ training;
• written instructions;
• online information;
• simply telling someone what to do.
Information
Employees must be given information about the risks involved in their work, and the steps that need to be taken
to reduce or remove those risks.
Where training is particularly important There are situations where health and safety training is particularly
important, for example:
• when people are new to the job;
• on exposure to new or increased risks;
• where existing skills may have become rusty or need updating.
Key actions for leaders
104
Who needs training
• Everyone!
INFORMATION
•
•
•
You
Managers
Supervisors
Who needs training
• Employees
• Contractors
105
Who needs training
Everyone!
You do! Whether you are an employer or self-employed, are you sure that you’re up to date with how to identify
the hazards and control the risks from your work? Do you know how to get help – from your trade association,
your local Chamber of Commerce, or your health and safety enforcing authority? Do you know what you have to
do about consulting your employees, or their representatives, on health and safety issues? If not, you would
probably benefit from some training.
Your managers and supervisors do!

If you employ managers or supervisors they need to know what you expect from them in terms of health and
safety, and how you expect them to deliver. They need to understand your health and safety policy,
where they fit in, and how you want health and safety managed. They may also need training in the specific
hazards of your processes and how you expect the risks to be controlled.
Your employees do!

Everyone who works for you, including self-employed people, needs to know how to work safely and without risks
to health. Like your supervisors, they need to know about your health and safety policy, your
arrangements for implementing it, and the part they play. They also need to know how they can raise any health
and safety concerns with you.
Contractors and self-employed people who may be working for you do!
Remember, these people might not be familiar with your working environment and safety systems that you have
put in place for regular employees.
Health and Safety Training Plan

STEP 1 Decide what training your organisation needs
STEP 2 Decide your training priorities
STEP 3 Choose your training methods and resources
STEP 4 Deliver the training
STEP 5 Check that the training has worked
105
Exercise – Types of training
What are the different types of training people?
EXERCISE
Types of training
106
What are the different ways of training people?
Types of training
106
Competent person
To enable you to comply with the law a competent person has
INFORMATION
• relevant knowledge, skills and experience
• the ability to apply these appropriately
• the necessary training
Competent person
• and appreciation of their limitations
• membership of a recognised professional body
107
Competent person
Definition
Competence may be considered as the ability to perform adequately in a given role. Regulation 7 of the
Management Regulations refers to appointing competent persons to assist as regards measures that must be
taken to comply with health and safety laws and states:
“A person shall be regarded as competent, where he has sufficient training and experience or knowledge and other
qualities to enable him properly to assist in undertaking the measures referred to”.
Organisations must appoint one or more competent people to help carry out the measures needed to comply
with the law. It is important for organisations to decide the level of competence necessary to comply with the law
Clearly the competence of key personnel is vital to the success of the organisation. Businesses tend not to thrive
with incompetent staff. The competence of operational staff, all tiers of management, and specialist support must
be evaluated and secured.
Good arrangements will include:

• Recruitment and placement procedures which ensure that employees (including managers) have the necessary
physical and mental abilities to do their jobs or can acquire them through training and experience.
• Systems to identify health and safety training needs arising from recruitment, changes in staff, plant,
substances, technology, processes or working practices.
• Systems for maintaining or enhancing competence by refresher training.
• Systems for examining the abilities of contractors, especially where they work close to or in collaboration with,
direct employees.
• Systems for ensuring the competence of contractors' employees, self-employed people or temporary workers.
• Systems and resources to provide the information, instruction, training and supporting communications effort
to meet these needs.
• Arrangements to ensure competent cover for staff absences, particularly those with critical health and safety
responsibilities.
• General health promotion and surveillance schemes which contribute to the maintenance of general health
and fitness (this may include assessments of fitness for work, rehabilitation, job adaptation following injury or
ill health or a policy on drugs or alcohol).
• Further information can be found within IOSH publication setting standards in health and safety: Raising
performance through training and competence development
107
Key actions to ensure competence
• Look at risk profile
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Training needs analysis
Individual capability
Identify workers who could help others
• Encourage ideas and suggestions
• Consider language difficulties
108
108
Supervision
• Level of supervision is determined by level of risk
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Trained and understand
Sufficient resources
Positive attitude
Supervision
• Consistent standard
109
Supervision
Controls within the organisation: the role of supervisors

The actions of leaders, line managers and supervisors are all important in delivering effective control of health and
safety risks.
Organisations will decide their own approach to supervision. Whatever method of supervision is used, the role of a
supervisor or team leader is important in implementing effective controls.
Because of the regular contact they have with workers, they can make an important contribution to making sure:
• everyone knows how to work safely and without risk to their health;
• all workers follow the organisation’s rules.
A supervisor can coach, help or guide workers to become and remain competent in these areas as well as others.
109
Control of contractors
• Legal duty
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Select
Appoint
Induct
• Control dependent on risk
• Collaborate
110
Managing contractors
Anyone engaging contractors has health and safety responsibilities, both for the contractors and anyone else that
could be affected by their activities. Contractors themselves also have legal health and safety responsibilities.
Make sure everyone understands the part they need to play in ensuring health and safety. Use of contractors in
itself does not result in poor health and safety standards, but poor management can lead to injuries, ill health,
additional costs and delays. Working closely with the contractor will reduce the risks to your own employees and
the contractors themselves.
Specific risks
Remember that contractors may be at particular risk; they may be strangers to your workplace and therefore
unfamiliar with your organisation’s procedures, rules, hazards and risks. Even regular contractors may need
reminding. The level of control needed will, of course, be proportionate to the complexity of the task. On sites
with major accident hazards, consider turnarounds and span of control – given the potentially very high numbers
of contractors on-site (compared with the numbers in routine operations)
110
Safety culture
“The product of individual or group values, attitudes and
INFORMATION
Safety culture
competencies and patterns of behaviour, that determine the
commitment to and style and proficiency of an organisation’s
health and safety programmes”
111
Safety culture
Organising for safety

The HSC’s Advisory Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations (ACSNI) report “Organising for Safety” in
1993 defined safety culture as: “The product of individual and group values, attitudes, perceptions, competencies
and patterns of behaviour that determine the commitment to and style and proficiency of, an organisation’s
health and safety management.
Organisations with a positive safety culture are characterised by communications founded on mutual trust, by
shared perceptions of the importance of safety, and by confidence in the efficacy of preventive measures”. This
definition is also used by the HSE in the Guidance Booklet HSG48 “Reducing Error and Influencing Behaviour”.
Other, more direct, definitions include: “The way we do things around here” (CBI, 1990).
Safe behaviour
Leaders should take positive steps to address human factors issues and to encourage safe behaviour. They need to
recognise that the prevailing health and safety culture is a major influence in shaping people’s safety-related
behaviour.
It is naïve to think of any organisation having a single, uniform, cohesive culture. Many studies have identified the
presence of sub cultures within organisations. Sub cultures are likely to develop where different work groups are
faced with different tasks, different levels of risk, and different working conditions.
Sub cultures are not necessarily undesirable, and can be useful in providing contextual insights into the effect of
the different hazards and risks faced by different workgroups.
Safety culture cannot be considered in isolation, it is a small part of the organisational culture, which in itself may
be part of broader industrial or national cultures.
111
H&S culture - influencing factors
• Leadership and commitment from senior management
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Effective communication
Shared view of risks and acceptable behaviour
Open minded learning from experience
• Ownership and acceptance from all staff and managers
• A balance between H&S and production
112

The following factors should be considered when attempting to develop a positive, effective safety culture:
Senior management commitment.

This is best indicated by the proportion of resources (time, money, people) and support allocated to health and
safety management and by the status given to health and safety. The active involvement of senior management
in the health and safety system is very important. Managers need to be seen to lead by example when it comes to
health and safety.
Effective ways for senior management to demonstrate their commitment:

Involvement in active monitoring through regular safety tours focusing on the most significant hazards, and
incorporating discussions with employees, asking for their input on hazards and solutions.
Involvement in reactive monitoring underlining the importance of the process. A high level of accountability has
been shown to be beneficial.
Attending health and safety committee meetings. Without management commitment the committee will lack
standing and credibility amongst staff. Safety meetings should ideally focus on the positive, acknowledging people
performing safely rather than concentrating on unsafe behaviors.
Although senior management commitment and effective leadership is vital in effecting change it must be noted
that the commitment and involvement of middle managers and operational staff is equally important.
Effective communication between all parts of the organisation, based on trust, openness and mutual respect. An
“open door” policy may be helpful with direct access to the management hierarchy where appropriate. In a
positive culture questions about health and safety should be part of everyday work conversations.
“Humanistic” approaches to management involving more regard by managers for individuals’ personal and work
problems have been shown to be effective.
A shared view of risks and standards of acceptable behavior.
Open-minded learning from experience, through the effective utilisation of systems for monitoring, auditing and
reviewing performance.
Ownership and acceptance of the need for health and safety controls, typically requiring a participative approach
to the development of control and a co-operative non-confrontational approach to securing adherence to agreed
procedures and practices.
112
Safety culture maturity
INFORMATION
Safety culture maturity scale
Generative
Calculative
Reactive Proactive Risk
Pathological We have
We do We are always management is
Why waste our systems in place
something after on alert for risks integral to
time on H+S? to manage all
an incident that may emerge everything we
like risks
do
113
Safety culture maturity scale
Attitudes and behaviours

Effectively managing for health and safety is not just about having a management or safety management system.
The success of whatever process or system is in place still hinges on the attitudes and behaviours of people in the
organisation (this is sometimes referred to as the ‘safety culture’).
Characteristics of the safety culture maturity stages:
Pathological
• the lawyers/regulator said it was OK
• of course we have accidents, it’s a dangerous business
• sack the idiot who had the accident
Reactive
• we are serious, but why don’t they do what they’re told?
• endless discussions to re-classify accidents
• you have to consider the condition under which we are working
Calculative
• we cracked it!
• lots and lots of audits
• HSE advisers chasing statistics
Proactive
• resources are available to fix things before an accident
• management is open but still obsessed with statistics
• procedures are “owned” by the workforce
Generative
• chronic unease – believe accidents
• safety seen as a profit centre
• new ideas are welcomed
Further information can be found within IOSH publication Promoting a positive culture. A guide to health and
safety culture.
113
Exercise – Where do you sit?
Commitment
EXERCISE
Commitment
114
Level of commitment
Commitment
114
Commitment
INFORMATION
Commitment to Health & Safety
115
Commitment to Health and Safety
So that’s where your company is. How about you and the commitment you show towards H&S. Where do you
sit?
Apathetic No opinion or interest
Non-compliant Fails to see the benefits. Will NOT do what

is expected.
Reluctant Does not see the benefits. Does what is

expected to keep job. Probably makes
reluctance known.
Compliant Sees the benefits. Does what is expected,

but no more.
Involved Does what can be done with existing

system.
Committed Creates and modifies the rules or systems

to achieve the goal.
115
Module 4 - Check
The importance of:
Module 4
• Measuring your performance using proactive and
reactive data
• Monitoring and reporting
Check
• Assessing how well the risks are being controlled
• Investigating incidents
116
Module 4 - Check
Learning objectives
The importance of;
• Measuring your performance using proactive and reactive data

• Monitoring and reporting to ensure that your plan has been implemented
• Assessing how well the risks are being controlled
• Investigating the causes of accidents, incidents or near misses
116
Monitoring and reporting
Monitoring and reporting are essential and allow you to:
INFORMATION
• make sure plans have been implemented
• assess how well the risks are being controlled
• meet your objectives
It involves:
• effective monitoring system
• sensible performance measures; and
• investigating and analysing incidents
117

Monitoring
Monitoring and reporting are important parts of health and safety arrangements. Management systems allow
organisations to receive both specific (e.g. incident-led) and routine reports on the performance of health and
safety policy. You should:
• Make sure that your plans have been implemented – ‘paperwork’ on its own is not a good performance
measure
• Assess how well the risks are being controlled and if you are achieving your aims. In some circumstances
• formal audits may be useful.
Monitoring requires time and effort so you need to allocate appropriate resources and possibly train staff involved
in it ahead of time. Businesses may monitor health and safety in different ways, depending on size and sector, but
there are some basic principles that apply across the board.
Monitoring needs to be timely. As with all other business systems, you want to know what is happening in your
organisation at the moment rather than at some point in the past.
Measuring performance
Checking that you are managing risks in your organisation is a vital, sometimes overlooked step. It will give you the
confidence that you are doing enough to keep on top of health and safety and maybe show you how you could do
things better in the future. Checking involves:
• setting up an effective monitoring system, backed up with sensible performance measures; and
• investigating and analysing incidents that will also make a big contribution to understanding health and safety
in your business
Reporting
The outcome of your monitoring will have most impact if it is reported back to key decision makers in your
organisation. Unless there’s a board-level commitment in advance, so you can act on what your monitoring tells
you, then all your efforts to collect information could be wasted.
117
Measuring performance
Key questions to ask
INFORMATION
• Where are we now?
• Why are we where we are?
• Are we getting better or worse over time?
• Are we doing the right things consistently?
• Is our management of risks proportionate?
• Is our management of health and safety efficient?
• Is an effective management system in place across all parts of
the organisation deployment)?
118
Consider
• Where are we now?

• Why are we where we are?
• Are we getting better or worse over time?
• Are we doing the right things consistently?
• Is our management of risks proportionate?
• Is our management of health and safety efficient?
• Is an effective management system in place across all parts of the organisation deployment)?
Key actions in measuring performance effectively
118
Exercise – Measuring performance
EXERCISE
• How can we measure H&S performance
• Consider ‘reactive’ measurements Measuring performance
• Consider ‘proactive’ measurements
119
What measures are there to see how well we are performing with H&S
Provide examples of both reactive and proactive measurements.
REACTIVE measures
PROACTIVE measures
119
Types of monitoring
• Monitor as you would other aspects of your business
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Requires time and effort
Allocate appropriate resources
Make it timely - what’s happening now, not then
Types of monitoring
• Report back to decision makers
120
Types of monitoring
Monitor as you would other aspects of your business

Use the same approach to monitor your health and safety performance as you would when you monitor other
aspects of your business.
Allocate appropriate resources

Monitoring requires time and effort. So you need to allocate appropriate resources and possibly train staff
involved in it ahead of time. Businesses may monitor health and safety in different ways, depending on size and
sector, but there are some basic principles that apply across the board.
Make it timely - what’s happening now, not then

Monitoring needs to be timely. As with all other business systems, you want to know what is happening in your
organisation at the moment rather than at some point in the past.
Report back to decision makers

The outcome of your monitoring will have most impact if it is reported back to key decision makers in your
organisation. Unless there’s a board-level commitment in advance, so you can act on what your monitoring tells
you, then all your efforts to collect information could be wasted. he
120
Proactive monitoring
• KPIs
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Inspections and Audits
Equipment testing
Training
• Committee meetings
• Risk assessments
• Opinion surveys
121
Proactive methods
Proactive methods monitor the design, development, installation and operation of management arrangements.
These tend to be preventive in nature, for example:
• routine inspections of premises, plant and equipment by staff;

• health surveillance to prevent harm to health;
• planned function check regimes for key pieces of plant.
Proactive monitoring gives an organisation feedback on its performance before an accident, incident or ill health.
This provides a firm basis for decisions about improvements in risk control and the health and safety management
system.
There are also additional benefits. The measurement of success through proactive monitoring reinforces positive
achievement by rewarding good work, rather than penalising failure after the event. Such reinforcement can
increase motivation to achieve continued improvement.
Examples of proactive monitoring include:
• Routine procedures to monitor specific objectives, e.g. quarterly or monthly reports or returns;
• Periodic examination of documents to check that systems relating to the promotion of the health and safety
culture are complied with. One example might be the way in which suitable objectives have been established
for each manager, regular review of performance;
• Assessment and recording of training needs, and delivery of suitable training;
• The systematic inspection of premises, plant and equipment by supervisors, maintenance staff, management,
safety representatives or other employees to ensure the continued effective operation of workplace
precautions;
• Environmental monitoring and health surveillance to check on the effectiveness of health control measures
and to detect early signs of harm to health;
• Systematic direct observation of work and behaviour by first-line supervisors to assess compliance with RCSs
and associated procedures and rules, particularly those directly concerned with risk control.
121
Reactive monitoring
• Accidents
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Ill health
External enforcement
Complaints
Reactive monitoring
• Property damage
122
Reactive monitoring
Reactive methods
Reactive methods monitor evidence of poor health and safety practice but can also identify better practices that
may be transferred to other parts of a business. Reactive systems, by definition, are triggered after an event.
Examples include:
• Identifying and reporting hazards.

• Identifying and reporting injuries.
• Identifying and reporting cases of ill health (including monitoring of sickness absence records).
• Identifying and reporting other losses, such as damage to property.
• Identifying and reporting near misses, (i.e. incidents with the potential to cause injury, ill health or loss).
• Identifying and reporting weakness or omissions in performance standards.
Check performance
Each of the above provides opportunities for an organisation to check performance, learn from mistakes, and
improve the health and safety management system and risk control.
Information gathered from investigations can also contribute to the “corporate memory”, providing a useful
opportunity to reinforce key health and safety messages.
Common features or trends can be discussed with the workforce, particularly safety representatives. Employees
can identify jobs or activities, which cause the greatest number of injuries, where remedial action may be most
beneficial.
122
Workplace inspections
• A physical inspection of premises, plant and equipment
INFORMATION
• Undertaken by:
 Directors / Supervisors / Line Managers
 Health & Safety Advisor
Workplace inspections
 Joint teams of managers and employees
 Safety Representatives
123
Inspecting the workplace

How often
The frequency of inspections will depend on the nature of the work. Inspections may be less often, for example, if
the work environment is low risk like in a predominantly administrative office. But if there are certain areas of a
workplace or specific activities that are high risk or changing rapidly, more frequent inspection may be justified,
for example on a construction project.
Good practice
• Plan a programme of inspections - you and your representatives can plan a programme of inspections in
advance.
• Agree the number of representatives - agree the number of representatives taking part in any one formal
inspection.
• Co-ordinate inspections - plan inspections if there is more than one representative, because they can then co-
ordinate their inspections to avoid unnecessary duplication.
• Inspect together - it will help your relationship with the representatives if you inspect together.
• Consult specialists - if there is a safety officer or specialist advisers.
• Break down tasks - for larger workplaces, it may not be practical to conduct a formal inspection of the entire
workplace in a single session.
Safety representatives
Union-appointed health and safety representatives can inspect the workplace. They have to give reasonable
notice in writing when they intend to carry out a formal inspection of the workplace, and have not inspected it in
the previous three months. If there is substantial change in conditions of work or HSE publishes new information
on hazards, the representatives are entitled to carry out inspections before three months have elapsed, or if it is
by agreement.
Following-up after an inspection

After an inspection: Explain the reasons for any follow-up action you decide to take to your representatives.
Let the representative who notified you of the inspection have the opportunity to inspect again so they can check
if the issues raised got appropriate attention, and record their views.
Share the follow-up action taken throughout the workplace and other relevant parts of the business, including the
health and safety committee where there is one.
There may be times when action may not be appropriate, you may not be able to act within a reasonable period
of time, or when the action you take is not acceptable to your safety representatives. It is advisable to explain the
reasons for the action you have decided to take in writing to your representatives.
You remain responsible for taking decisions about managing health and safety, but by explaining the reasons for
actions and being open with your representatives, you can show that you have considered what they had to say.
123
Auditing performance
• A systematic and critical examination of safety management
INFORMATION
systems and procedures
• It should assess the quality & implementation of the safety
policy
• Identify potential risks and their associated control measures
• Analyse workplace activities and assess if they are being
carried out safely
124
Auditing
Auditing is an essential element of a health and safety management system, but it is no substitute for the other
essential parts of the system. In the same way that organisations cannot manage finances by an annual financial
audit organisations cannot manage health and safety by periodic audits alone. Safety Management Systems are
required to manage health and safety on a day-to-day basis.
Some organisations use the term loosely, covering a broad range of inspections or other monitoring activities, the
HSE use the following, precise, definition:
“The structured process of collecting independent information on the efficiency, effectiveness and reliability of
the total health and safety management system and drawing up plans for corrective action”.
Auditing supports monitoring by providing managers with information on how effectively plans and the
components of the health and safety management system are being implemented, checking on the adequacy and
effectiveness of the management arrangements and Risk Control Strategies.
Within the HSG65 system the auditing process involves:

• Collecting information about the health and safety management system.
• Making judgements about the adequacy and performance of:
• Management arrangements (in place, and appropriate).
• Risk control systems (exist, adequate, implemented, and consistent with the hazard profile of the
organisation).
• Workplace precautions (in place and appropriate).
Making judgements
The adequacy of a health and safety management system is judged by making a comparison between what is
found against a relevant 'standard' or benchmark. If there are no clear standards, the assessment process will be
unreliable. Legal standards, HSE guidance and applicable industry standards should be used to inform audit
judgments.
124
Investigating accidents
• Be prepared for the unexpected
INFORMATION
• Reasons to investigate
• Benefits Investigating accidents
125
Investigating accidents
Dealing with the unexpected

In any business or organisation things don’t always go to plan. You need to prepare to deal with unexpected
events in order to reduce their consequences. Workers and managers will be more competent in dealing with the
effects of an accident or emergency if you have effective plans in place that are regularly tested.
You should monitor and review any measures you have put in place to help control risk and prevent accidents and
incidents from happening. Findings from your investigations can form the basis of action to prevent the accident
or incident from happening again and to improve your overall risk management. This will also point to areas of
your risk assessments that need to be reviewed.
An effective investigation requires a methodical, structured approach to information gathering, collation and
analysis.
Why investigate?
• Health and safety investigations form an essential part of the monitoring process that you are required to carry
out. Incidents, including near misses, can tell you a lot about how things actually are in reality.
• Investigating your accidents and reported cases of occupational ill health will help you uncover and correct any
breaches in health and safety legal compliance you may have been unaware of.
• The fact that you thoroughly investigated an incident and took remedial action to prevent further occurrences
would help demonstrate to a court that your company has a positive attitude to health and safety.
• Your investigation findings will also provide essential information for your insurers in the event of a claim.
Benefits
An investigation can help you identify why the existing risk control measures failed and what improvements or
additional measures are needed. It can:
provide a true snapshot of what really happens and how work is really done (workers may find short cuts to make
their work easier or quicker and may ignore rules – you need to be aware of this);
improve the management of risk in the future;
help other parts of your organisation learn;
demonstrate your commitment to effective health and safety and improving employee morale and thinking
towards health and safety.
Near misses
Investigating near misses and undesired circumstances, where no one has been harmed, is as useful as, and may
be easier than, investigating accidents. In workplaces where a trade union is recognised, appointed health and
safety representatives have the right to:
• investigate potential hazards and dangerous occurrences in the workplace;
• examine causes of workplace accidents.
125
Benchmarking
1. Deciding what to benchmark
INFORMATION
Benchmarking
2. Analysing where you are
3. Selecting partners
4. Working with your partners
5. Learning and acting on lessons learned
126
Benchmarking
The objective of benchmarking is to learn from others, learning more about your organisation’s strengths and weaknesses in
the process, and then acting on the lessons learned – leading to real improvement. Benchmarking should not be viewed as a
means to an end, not an end in itself, as some organisations aim for business excellence and want to be seen as ‘best’ or at
least better than average.
The HSE suggest a five step cycle for health and safety benchmarking.
Step 1 - Deciding what to benchmark

• Benchmarking can be applied to any aspect of health and safety but it makes sense to prioritise and focus initially on high
hazard and risk topics, as these are areas where most harm could be done.
• The findings of risk assessments and analysis of accident and ill-health patterns may indicate priorities, especially if any
common causes can be identified.
• Benchmarks should be identified for both:
• Health and safety processes (how you do things).
• Health and safety performance (the results of what you do).
• Process benchmarking allows real improvement to be made as you examine what goes on and how it could be done better,
these may be at workplace level (e.g. how you control a particular hazard) or management level (e.g. how you investigate
incidents, carry out risk assessments).
Step 2 - Analysing where you are

• Identify your starting position - are you complying with legislation, ACoP’s, or guidance relevant to your chosen topic?
How can you measure where you are now and where you want to be?
• Measures could be based on hard data, e.g. the percentage of managers who have completed health and safety training, or
more qualitative in nature.
• Comparison of audit system results (sometimes these are ‘scores’) can often be used as a measure, providing they are of
similar type and content.
•
Step 3 - Selecting Partners
• Large organisations can find partners both within the organisation (internal benchmarking) and outside (external
benchmarking).
• Smaller organisations will probably need to look outside, as they are unlikely to have a wide range of potential partners to
choose from inside their firms.
Step 4 - Working with your Partner

• Basic considerations include:
• Confidentiality - respect your partner and keep to agreed topics.
• Realism - don’t try to do too much in one go.
• Comparability - information exchanged must be directly comparable to be useful.
• Timescales – agree deadlines and stick to them.
• Courtesy – send a message of thanks.
•
Step 5 - Learning and Acting on Lessons Learned
• Devise an action plan, based on the findings and generate SMART objectives.
• Implement your action plan and regularly review progress with it. If there are problems with the Safety Management
System it may be useful to contact partner(s) again to help you overcome them.
• Remember continuous improvement - if standards have moved on, reset your benchmark and start from Step 1 again.
126
Impact of external changes
• How external changes impact the organisation
INFORMATION
• External issues to consider
• Sources of information to help you stay alert
127

Impact
The organization must understand its occupational health and safety challenges and the risks inherent to its
market segment and be alert to the external issues that have an impact on what they are trying to achieve.
External issues include the following:
• The legislative framework including statutory, regulatory and other forms of legal requirements;
• Competition and market conditions;
• Relationship with contractors, suppliers, partners and other external interested parties;
• Key drivers and trends of relevance to the industry or sector in which the organization operates
The organisation will be further impacted depending on the market in which it operates in, such as international,
national, regional or local.
Sources of information
There are various sources of information on external changes that may have an impact on the organisation
available including:
• Regulatory requirements such as the HSE www.hse.gov.uk and www.legislation.gov.uk

• Guidance and best practice including The Institution of Occupational Safety and Health www.iosh.com
• Economic update from the House of Commons library at www.commonslibrary.parliament.uk and the
Government website www.gov.uk
• Industry/trade associations
• Accrediting organizations
• Insurance companies
127
Key outcomes
• Reviewing effectiveness of the policy
INFORMATION
• Identifying shortcomings
Key outcomes
• Addressing weaknesses
128
Key outcomes
It is important that organisations review their health and safety performance. It allows you to establish whether
the essential health and safety principles – effective leadership and management, competence, worker
consultation and involvement – have been embedded in the organisation. It tells you whether your system is
effective in managing risk and protecting people. Carrying out reviews will confirm whether your health and safety
arrangements still make sense.
Review the policy

You should review the adequacy of your Health and Safety policy whenever there is a significant change . It is also
best practice to review it annually.
Identifying any shortcomings

Assessing ‘paperwork’ on its own is not a good performance measure. You need to assess how well the risks are
being controlled and if you are achieving your aims. In some circumstances formal audits may be useful but
equally important is to learn from accidents and incidents that may reveal shortcomings and allow you to take
appropriate steps to remediate.
Addressing weaknesses
Any corrective actions should be prioritised so that you can address the weaknesses that require immediate
attention from those that do not present an immediate risk. A formal plan of action that sets out very clearly the
action required, timeline and responsible person(s) should be created and reviewed regularly.
128
Module 5 - Act
The importance of:
Module 5
• Strong and visible leadership
• Organisational commitment
• Corporate social responsibility Act
• The benefit of celebrating good performance
• Continuous improvement
129
Module 5 – Act
Learning objectives
The importance of:
• Strong and visible leadership, and active commitment from top management; how they should lead by
example, set the standards, culture and values, and champion safety and health for the company;
• Organisational commitment to good corporate social responsibility;
• The benefit of celebrating good performance;
• The requirements for good corporate governance and annual reporting, and the effect that board decisions
have on the business, for employees, investors and other stakeholders;
• The importance of continuous improvement in line with organisational priorities.
129
Act
• Review your performance
INFORMATIION
• Take action from lessons learned
Act
130
Act
It is important that organisations review their health and safety performance.
It allows you to establish whether the essential health and safety principles – effective leadership and
management, competence, worker consultation and involvement – have been embedded in the organisation. It
tells you whether your system is effective in managing risk and protecting people.
You should
Review your performance

• Learn from accidents and incidents, ill-health data, errors and relevant experience, including from other
organisations.
• Revisit plans, policy documents and risk assessments to see if they need updating.
Take action on lessons learned

• Include audit and inspection reports.
130
Exercise – A good leader
EXERCISE
A good leader
131
A good leader
Qualities of a good leader
131
Effective leadership
• The importance of health and safety leadership
INFORMATION
• Qualities of a good leader
• Guidance by the Institute of Directors (IoD) INDG417 Rev Effective leadership
132
Effective leadership
Leaders, at all levels, need to understand the range of health and safety risks in their part of the organisation and
to give proportionate attention to each of them. This applies to the level of detail and effort put into assessing the
risks, implementing controls, supervising and monitoring.
They must show a genuine commitment to the cause and lead by example.
A good leader has the following qualities

• Has the motivation to prevent harm to anyone
• Ensures a safe place of work for staff
• Has respect for the law and regulations
• Maintains and develops skills, knowledge and experience in themselves and others
• Is objective, fair and reasonable, and takes responsibility for his own as well as others actions
• Acts with conviction, provides clear direction and communicates effectively.
132
Deliver health and safety
• Ownership
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Responsibility
Lead by example
Good practice
133

Core actions
To take responsibility and ‘ownership’ of health and safety, members of the board must ensure that:
• Health and safety arrangements are adequately resourced.
• Competent health and safety advice is obtained.
• Risk assessments are carried out.
• Employees or their representatives are involved in decisions that affect their health and safety.
• The health and safety implications of introducing new processes, working practices or personnel, are fully
considered. Boardroom decisions must be made in the context of the organisation’s health and safety policy;
it is important to ‘design-in’ health and safety when implementing change.
Good practice
• Lead by example. Be seen on the ‘shop floor’, following all safety measures and addressing any breaches
immediately.
• Consider health and safety when deciding senior management appointments.
• Implement procurement standards for goods, equipment and services to prevent the introduction of
expensive health and safety hazards.
• Assess the health and safety arrangements of partners, key suppliers and contractors. Their performance
could adversely affect yours.
• Set up a separate risk management or health and safety committee as a subset of the board, chaired by a
senior executive, to ensure the key issues are addressed and that time and effort are not wasted on trivial risks
and unnecessary bureaucracy.
• Provide health and safety training to some or all of the board to promote understanding and knowledge of the
key issues.
• Support worker involvement in health and safety, to improve participation and help demonstrate
commitment.
133
Reviewing performance
• Formal boardroom annual review
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Plans and targets
Actions to address any weakness or events
Share performance figures with stakeholders
134
Carrying out reviews

Carrying out reviews will confirm whether your health and safety arrangements still make sense. For example,
you’ll be able to:
• check the validity of your health and safety policy;
• ensure the system you have in place for managing health and safety is effective.
You’ll be able to see how the health and safety environment in your business has changed. This will enable you to
stop doing things that are no longer necessary while allowing you to respond to new risks.
Reviewing also gives you the opportunity to celebrate and promote your health and safety successes. Increasingly,
third parties are requiring partner organisations to report health and safety performance publicly.
The most important aspect of reviewing is that it closes the loop. The outcomes of your review become what you
plan to do next with health and safety.
In the boardroom
A formal boardroom review of health and safety performance is essential. It allows the board to establish
whether the essential health and safety principles – strong and active leadership, worker involvement, and
assessment and review – have been embedded in the organisation. It tells you whether your system is effective in
managing risk and protecting people.
Core actions
• The board should review health and safety performance at least once a year. The review process should:
• Examine whether the health and safety policy reflects the current priorities, plans and targets.
• Examine whether risk management and other health and safety structures have been effectively reporting to
the board.
• Report health and safety shortcomings, and the effect of all relevant board and management decisions.
• Decide actions to address any weaknesses and a system to monitor their implementation.
• Consider immediate reviews in the light of major shortcomings or events.
Good Practice
• Recording performance on health and safety and wellbeing in annual reports to investors and stakeholders.
• Making extra ‘shop floor’ visits to gather information for the formal review.
• Celebration of good health and safety performance at central and local level.
134
Effectiveness of internal control
• Reviewing the effectiveness of internal control
INFORMATION
• Reports during the year
• Annual reports at the end of the year Reviewing the effectiveness
of internal control
135
Reviewing the effectiveness of internal control

Essential component
Review is an essential component of the internal control process. The board will need to form its own view on
effectiveness after due and careful enquiry based on the information and assurances provided to it. Reports on
internal control should be regularly reviewed by the board. An assessment of the state of the internal control
system is an essential part of the annual public statement.
When reviewing reports during the year, the board should:

Consider the significant risks and assess how they have been identified, evaluated and managed.
• Assess the effectiveness of the internal control systems in managing the significant risks.
• Consider whether significant failings or weaknesses are being addressed promptly and effectively.
• Consider the need for more extensive monitoring of the internal control system.
The board’s annual assessment should consider:

• The changes since the last annual assessment in the nature and extent of significant risks, and the company’s
ability to respond to changes in its business and the external environment.
• The scope and quality of management’s ongoing monitoring of risks and of the system of internal control,
including the work of its internal audit function and other providers of assurance, where applicable.
• The extent and frequency of the communication of the results of the monitoring to the board enabling it to
build up a cumulative assessment of the state of control in the company and the effectiveness of risk
management.
• The incidence of significant control failings or weaknesses that have been identified during the period, and the
extent to which they have resulted in unforeseen outcomes with an actual, or potential, impact on the
company’s financial performance or condition.
• The effectiveness of the company’s public reporting processes.
Should the board become aware at any time of a significant failing or weakness in internal control, it should
determine how the failing or weakness arose and re-assess the effectiveness of management’s ongoing processes
for designing, operating and monitoring the system of internal control.
135
Lead from the top
• Safety Tours
INFORMATION
• Rule maker, not breaker
• Engaging and talking to people Lead from the top
136
Lead from the top

There are a number of methods in which a leader can be seen to be visible and a number of these are now going
to be discussed.
Safety Tours
Strong leaders will engage their own employees by carrying out regular tours of the workplace which will
demonstrate to employees that they are cared for and respected.
Rule maker, not breaker

An example of this could be the usage and wearing of PPE, remaining to walkways, not being hypocritically and
not informing people, ‘do as I say, not as I do’. A strong leader will challenge those who are breaking the rules and
will ensure that the rest of the workforce are aware that non-compliance is not acceptable.
Engage and talk to people

It is surprising how many leaders use a laissez-faire approach, one in which they remain in their offices and do not
really understand what is happening in their employees worlds. This can easily be removed by regularly talking to
employees about their opinions, their issues and concerns and spending some time with them. There have been
many examples on television whereby leaders of large organisations have gone undercover in order to find out
the true thoughts of their organisations. This seems an extreme example of this point and really this could be
achieved by getting out of the ivory tower. This will go along way not only in Health and Safety management, but
also in other areas such as staff retention.
136
Continual improvement
• Continuous process
INFORMATION
• Frequency
• Cycle Continual improvement
137
Continual improvement
Continuous process
Reviewing should be a continuous process undertaken at different levels within the organisation, including
responses:
• To remedy failures to implement workplace precautions observed by supervisors or managers in the course of
routine activities.
• To remedy sub-standard performance identified by active and reactive monitoring.
• To the assessment of plans at individual, departmental, site, group or organisational level.
• To the results of audits.
How often
A senior management review should take place periodically to assess compliance and to ascertain whether the
Safety Management System is effective in achieving its objectives and targets, i.e. is the Safety Management
System working?
The review should take place at set intervals, and should look at the potential for continual improvement,
suitability and effectiveness as well as the present situation. Management review meetings should consider not
just the internal audit reports, but also the monitoring and measurement reports.
Based on the review, recommendations for improving health and safety performance can be made, and
incorporated into the organisation’s health and safety policy. This may require that new concrete objectives are
formulated, and the programme is modified to achieve these new objectives.
Cycle
Thus, a cycle is created which will facilitate continuous improvements in an organisation’s health and safety
performance. The effective functioning of the system is dependent upon the existence of procedures for
thoroughly documenting:
• Each element of the safety management system cycle.

• The linkages between these elements.
Feeding information on success and failure back into the system is an essential element in motivating employees
to maintain and improve performance.
Successful organisations emphasise positive reinforcement and concentrate on encouraging progress on those
indicators, which demonstrate improvements in risk control.
137
Celebrating success
• Improved morale
INFORMATION
• Better employee engagement
• Harmonisation of teamwork Celebrating Success
138
Celebrating success
It is suggested that at this point you refer back to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs that was discussed at the start of
this course, particularly the points around Psychological needs. If you celebrate a success in any shape or form
(but particularly in Health and Safety) those involved will likely continue to assist in future works. Far too often,
organisations spend many hours publicising the negative aspects of health and safety and do not focus on the
successes and wins that have been achieved. By spending time celebrating the successes employees and
organisations can see where they have come from and can assist to see where they are going. This is basic
psychology in its rawest form and this can be seen in children. Celebrating a success often means that a child will
want to repeat whatever it is they were rewarded for.
Some of the benefits celebrating success are:
Improved morale
This will greatly assist with retention of employees and will go a long way in supporting the motivation that
employees have for their individual work and the health and safety of themselves, their colleagues and others.
Better employee engagement

Celebrating success is likely to generate a platform for employees to be engaged with their colleagues, their
managers and provide a means of communicating suggestions for improvements on a regular basis.
Harmonisation of teamwork
Celebrating success can often harmonise team work and can generate some healthy competition between
departments to work safer and more efficiently.
138
Corporate Social Responsibility
• What is CSR?
INFORMATION
• Importance Corporate Social Responsibility
• The role of leaders
• IOSH position
139
Corporate Social Responsibility
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has many definitions but, in essence, it is based on the integration of
economic, social, ethical and environmental concerns in business operations. The major social concerns include
the welfare of the key stakeholders in the business, especially employees. Thus, occupational safety and health
(OHS) forms an integral part of CSR.
The search for a good Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) environment and the promotion of a culture of risk
prevention are two of the firm’s main social responsibilities, and consequently an integral part of CSR. For
organizations that want to develop well-rounded CSR strategies, employee health and well-being must be at the
center. Because, if you don’t take care of your employees, everything else eventually falls apart.
Leadership and CSR

The 21st century world is shaped by leaders. In order to build a sustainable world, intersection of leadership and
ethics is a must. Leadership has a vital role in promoting an ethical and moral behaviour. Moreover, leaders should
be models for the followers and should aim to shape organizations by their own values and characteristics.
Employees rely on their leaders for guidance when faced with ethical dilemmas hence leaders’ behaviour should
be “visible and consistently ethical, both internally and externally to the organization.
Corporate Social responsibility is an ethical framework. Leaders and organizations engaged in CSR act for the
benefit of their stakeholders – employees, customers, suppliers, community and society at large.
IOSH position on CSR

High standards of health and safety are essential to the CSR and sustainability agenda. Going beyond basic
minimum compliance means that organisations can not only save lives, but also enhance their reputations,
strengthen their resilience and improve their financial results. Better transparency and meaningful corporate
reporting can help drive improved occupational safety and health performance across organisations and supply
chains, making them safer, healthier and more sustainable
139
Corporate governance
• “The degree of ownership and control which the organisation
INFORMATION
Corporate Governance
holds in relation to business risks”
• “The process by which corporations are made responsive to
the rights and wishes of stakeholders within the organisation”
• “The way in which organisations take responsibility for their
actions”
140
Corporate Governance of Safety
Corporate governance has been defined as:
“The process by which corporations are made responsive to the rights and wishes of stakeholders within the
organisation” or:
“The way in which organisations take responsibility for their actions”.
Since December 1999 companies incorporated in the UK and listed on the London Stock Exchange (LSE) have been
subjected to the LSE’s corporate governance requirements. This requires boards of directors to identify, evaluate
and manage their significant risks and to assess the effectiveness of their internal control systems.
The Combined Code on Corporate Governance (known as the Turnbull Report) pulls together the range of
corporate governance pronouncements over the years and provides guidance on the implementation of the
legislation. This report was superseded by the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) report in 2014 which sets a
number of principles a board should work towards and have in place.
In the context of Turnbull corporate governance relates to:
“The degree of ownership and control which the organisation holds in relation to business risks”.
The Code does not advocate “zero risk”, but rather a healthy level of “controlled risk”, through awareness of
threats and opportunities in a changing environment.
In essence the guidance is about the adoption of a risk-based approach to establishing a system of internal control
and reviewing its effectiveness.
140
H&S in annual reports
• Risks and controls, Goals and targets
INFORMATION
•
•
•
Progress and Specific developments
Arrangements for consulting
Injuries, illnesses and dangerous occurrences
H&S in Annual Reports
• The total number of employee days lost
• Enforcement notices served on the company
• Convictions for health and safety offences
141
Health and Safety in Annual Reports
The Government and the HSE believe that companies reporting on health and safety performance to common standards will
help achieve national health and safety targets. The HSE guidance explains how to address health and safety issues in the
company's published annual report on business activities and performance. Appropriate health and safety information should
be included in the published reports on company activities and performance. This demonstrates to stakeholders the
company's commitment to effective health and safety risk management. It also shows that the company is alert to the need to
monitor and improve its health and safety performance. There is presently no legal requirement for companies to report on
their health and safety performance, though the HSE considers it to be good practice.
Reporting should include the following information:

• The broad context of the company’s health and safety policy;
• Significant risks faced by employees and others and the strategies and systems in place to control
them;
• Progression towards achieving health and safety goals in the reporting period, and on health and safety
plans for the forthcoming period;
• Specific developments impacting upon the company's health and safety performance, (e.g. the
introduction of new working practices, technological change or employee training and development);
• Significant health and safety plans for the coming years which build on past performance and are
noteworthy;
• Arrangements for consulting employees and involving safety representatives;
• Note: If the information is not currently available an indication should be given of the steps being
taken to gather the information for publication in later reports. In addition, the report should provide
the following data, on health and safety performance;
• The number of injuries, illnesses and dangerous occurrences which should be reported to your health
and safety enforcing authority by RIDDOR;
• Brief details of the circumstances of any fatalities, and of the actions taken to prevent any recurrence;
• The number of other cases of physical and mental illness, disability or other health problems that are
caused or made worse by someone's work first reported during the period;
• The total number of employee days lost due to all causes of physical and mental illness including
injuries, disability or other health problems. The number of days thought to be caused or made worse
by someone's work should be identified, as should the main causes of absence;
• The number of health and safety enforcement notices served on the company and information on what
the notices required the company to do;
• The number and nature of convictions for health and safety offences sustained by the company, their
outcome in terms of penalty and costs, and what has been done to prevent a recurrence;
• The total cost to the company of the occupational injuries and illnesses suffered by staff in the
reporting period.
These recommendations should be considered as a minimum standard, and companies are encouraged to exceed them.
Additional information on the outcome of health and safety audits, and on the extent and effectiveness of health and safety
training provided to staff, may also be useful.
141
Exercise
Complete the H&S checklist
EXERCISE
Measuring Performance
142
What measures are there to see how well we are performing with H&S
Provide examples of both reactive and proactive measurements.
REACTIVE Measurements
PROACTIVE Measurements
142
Health and safety checklist
Plan
• The organisation has a health and safety policy
• Robust risk assessment procedures have been developed
• Health and safety targets have been set and are measured
• Health and safety is an agenda item at every Board meeting
Health and Safety Checklist – Plan
Award yourself 1 point for each question if you can answer positively and then compare your
score with the action matrix.
Next slide
143
Do
• The Board receive competent health and safety advice
• All Directors and senior personnel are sufficiently trained in
health and safety
• There is adequate consultation with staff on H&S
• Risks are minimised and sensible control measures applied
Health and Safety Checklist – Do
Next slide
144
Check
• There is a programme of H&S audits or assessments
• Reactive and proactive H&S performance data is provided to
the Board
• Procedures are in place to implement new and changed legal
requirements
• Incidents are fully investigated and actions implemented
Health and Safety Checklist – Check
Next slide
145
Act
• Directors undertake an appropriate review of H&S
• Risk management systems are reported to the Board
• Immediate reviews are carried out following major
shortcomings or events
• The organisation celebrates good H&S performance
Health and Safety Checklist – Act
Next slide
146
Scoring matrix
Score Action
0-4 An immediate review of your H&S

Management System is needed
5-8 Partially compliant but reactive to H&S not
proactive
9 - 12 Good systems in place, further improvement
opportunities
13 - 16 Robust arrangements in place which should be
maintained
Total up your score and compare it with the Scoring Matrix.
Score Action
0-4 An immediate review of your H&S Management System

is needed
5-8 Partially compliant but reactive to H&S not proactive
9 - 12 Good systems in place, further improvement

opportunities
13 - 16 Robust arrangements in place which should be
maintained
147
Summary
• Moral
Summary
• Financial
• Legal
• Plan
• Do
• Check
• Act
148
Summary
Module 1 – The moral, financial and legal case
Module 2 – Plan
Determine your policy/Plan for implementation
Module 3 – Do
Profile risks/Organise for health and safety/Implement your plan
Module 4 – Check
Measure performance (monitor before events, investigate after events)
Module 5 – Act
Review performance/Act on lessons learned
148
IOSH Safety for Executives
Safety for Executives and Directors and Directors
149
IOSH Safety for Executives and

Directors
149

IOSH SED Manual 2023 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IOSH SED Manual 2023 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IOSH Safety for Executives

Safety for Executives and Directors

IOSH Safety for Executives and

Fire and safety arrangements

The Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH)

IOSH role: Supporting safety and health professionals

What IOSH do: Support, research, advice, training

Why IOSH do it: Safer, healthier workplaces

Meet the Trainer

Meet the Group

Course aims and objectives

Module 1 – The moral, financial and legal case

Module 1 - The moral, legal and financial case

Moral duty of care

Questions to consider asking yourself:

• What could happen to your reputation as an Executive or Director?

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs

1. The Moral Reason

Is it acceptable to cause pain and suffering?

Do we owe a duty of care to our employees?

Do we have a moral responsibility as Directors and Leaders?

Based on UK Figures taken from latest HSE statistics estimate:

QUIZ – “The Numbers Game”

Total No of work-related fatal injuries

No of workers suffering from work-related ill health

No of workers sustaining a non-fatal work-related

No of workers suffering from work-related stress,

No of mesothelioma deaths due to past asbestos

No of workers suffering from COVID-19 believed to

Fatal Injury statistics

Summary for 2020/21

Number of fatal injuries to workers in Great Britain from 1974 to 2021

Reported non-fatal injuries

Latest figures from HSE (for the reporting years 2020/21)

Living with the consequences

Breaking the news to a loved one

Living with the consciousness of a fatality

Psychological effect (regret)

The importance of reporting the impact of any

The legal reason

The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974

The facts of the case are:

Using the information above identify possible failings by:

The Director / Senior Manager

The two divisions of the law

Civil and criminal law

The Distinct Features Of Civil And Criminal Law Systems

Action brought by an individual. Action brought by the State.

Insurance can be obtained. Punishment cannot be insured against.

Heard in County or High Court. Heard in Magistrates or Crown Court.

The Tort of Negligence

On the balance of probabilities

The defendant owed him a duty of care

The defendant breached that duty

The breach caused his injury

British Railways Board v Herrington [1972] 1 All ER 749

Paris v Stepney Borough Council [1951] 1 All ER 42, HL

Contesting a personal injury claim

Dispute the facts

No duty of care exists

Volenti non fit injuria

Employers’ Liability (EL) insurance

Compensatory function of damages in tort