HSE has recently issued several safety alerts which have relevance to the construction industry. Please read them to check if there are actions you need to take.
Deterioration and failure of cold / frozen food store ceilings
HSE recently completed a fatal accident investigation following the failure of the ceiling of a frozen food store. The store was constructed in the 1970s and the ceiling panels were bolted to a metal support frame. The investigation revealed that the bolts had failed primarily due to fatigue and corrosion.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/safetybulletins/coldstoreceilings.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=1
'False' engagement of tipping hooks on 'builders' skips
A fatality during the tipping-out of a 'builders' skip has identified a potential danger whereby fabrication of the skip can result in a lip on which tipping hooks may 'falsely' engage.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/safetybulletins/tippinghooks.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=2
2. ++ Ladder Exchange ++
Ladder Exchange is helping to remove dodgy ladders from Britain's workplaces. This year's initiative ends on 30th November - so if you have a ladder which is broken, damaged or bent, hurry now to exchange it for a safe, new one at one of our partner companies.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/falls/ladderexchange.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=3
3. ++ HEALTH AND SAFETY STATISTICS 2009/10 ++
Statistics released by HSE show that despite a significant fall in the number of recorded deaths and injuries construction is still one of Britain's most dangerous industries. Falls from height remain the biggest cause of fatalities with the other main causes being struck by a moving/falling object, being struck by a moving vehicle and collapses.
Further information
HSE Press Release - http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2010/hse-statistics2010cons.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=4
Construction statistics - http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/industry/construction/index.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=5
4. ++ RECENT ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY ++
Read details of some recent HSE prosecutions and enforcement action in the construction sector and find sources of relevant advice.
Work at height
17 November 2010 - A foam manufacturer has been fined after a worker fell through a roof at its Derbyshire factory. The worker had repaired a leaking roof and was walking back down when he fell through a fragile roof light.
The HSE investigation found Recticel Ltd had failed to properly plan the work and consider the risks. The company admitted breaching regulations 4(1) and 9(1) of the Work at Height Regulations and was fined a total of £13,000 and £5,098 costs.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2010/coi-em-10010.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=6
Further information
Working at height - http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/safetytopics/workingatheight.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=7
Roof repair work - What you need to know as a busy builder http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/site3.pdf?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=8
Roofwork - http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/safetytopics/roofwork.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=9
Struck by
10 November 2010 - Two Black Country construction firms have been fined after a worker was severely injured by falling timber.
Neil Anson was struck by timber roof trusses being unloaded by a mobile crane from a lorry trailer.
HSE prosecuted Kent Road Construction Limited and Mr S K Sharma, trading as Fortmere Construction. Kent Road Construction Ltd was fined £6,000 and ordered to pay £4,496 costs while Mr Shiv Sharma, trading as Fortmere Construction, was fined £4,000 and ordered to pay £899 costs.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2010/coi-wm-22810.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=10
17 November 2010 - A Cardiff-based recycling company has ordered to pay over £230,000 after an employee died following an incident at its premises.
John Penhalagan, 44, was employed by Celsa Manufacturing (UK) when he was struck by a crane hook weighing 3.7 tonnes used to convey ladles of molten steel.
An HSE investigation found that while there was no mechanical defect with the crane, the hooks were able to move at head height near to operators on the ground without adequate safeguards.
Celsa Manufacturing (UK) pleaded guilty to breaching section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. It was fined £200,000 and ordered to pay costs of £36,294.38.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2010/coi-w-1110ap.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=11
Further information
CDM Regs 2007 -http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/cdm.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=12
Lifting Operations - http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/safetytopics/cranes.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=13
Power cables
11 November 2010 - A Birmingham heating company has been convicted after one of its workers suffered serious burns from a power cable. The worker was using a hand held mini breaker to dig through concrete in an alleyway when he struck an 11kv cable under the pavement.
The Magna Heating Company Limited which is no longer trading pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 13(2) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 The company was fined £1.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2010/coi-wm-26710.htm?ebul=cons/nov10&cr=14
Monday 29 November 2010
Saturday 27 November 2010
Lords debate on Lord Young’s review
As you may have noted there was a debate in the House of Lords yesterday on Lord Young’s recent review, ‘Common Sense, Common Safety’ to which RoSPA contributed views and evidence.
(It can be accessed again via http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=6977 Lord Young speaks at 47 mins into broadcast
or The Hansard link is at Lords debate on Lord Young’s report http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/text/101125-0001.htm#10112529000774
On the whole the debate was quite broad and thoughtful. Clearly many of Lord Young’s proposals are to be supported, including his underlying message about proportionality and simplification for small firms - on which RoSPA have been campaigning for some time.
There were lots of good points raised by peers, particularly about the need to free up outdoor education and to bear down on aggressive claims advertising. Also, the need to see safety essentially as a matter of balance and good judgement seems to be widely shared.
At the same time, several peers, including Lord Jordan, Lord Brougham and Vaux, Lord McKenzie, Baroness Turner, and Baroness Donaghy drew attention to the continuing costs of accidents and ill health, the strong business case for health and safety and the extent of work still to be done in this area, including in apparently ‘low hazard’ settings.
In the coming months RoSPA will be continuing to work with other organisations, including feeding in to consultation on implementation on various parts of the review. And we will be continuing to work via the All Party Group on Health and Safety to explain to parliamentarians the patient work which goes on every day, largely unseen, to prevent work related accidents and health damage.
(It can be accessed again via http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=6977 Lord Young speaks at 47 mins into broadcast
or The Hansard link is at Lords debate on Lord Young’s report http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/text/101125-0001.htm#10112529000774
On the whole the debate was quite broad and thoughtful. Clearly many of Lord Young’s proposals are to be supported, including his underlying message about proportionality and simplification for small firms - on which RoSPA have been campaigning for some time.
There were lots of good points raised by peers, particularly about the need to free up outdoor education and to bear down on aggressive claims advertising. Also, the need to see safety essentially as a matter of balance and good judgement seems to be widely shared.
At the same time, several peers, including Lord Jordan, Lord Brougham and Vaux, Lord McKenzie, Baroness Turner, and Baroness Donaghy drew attention to the continuing costs of accidents and ill health, the strong business case for health and safety and the extent of work still to be done in this area, including in apparently ‘low hazard’ settings.
In the coming months RoSPA will be continuing to work with other organisations, including feeding in to consultation on implementation on various parts of the review. And we will be continuing to work via the All Party Group on Health and Safety to explain to parliamentarians the patient work which goes on every day, largely unseen, to prevent work related accidents and health damage.
Wednesday 17 November 2010
Civil sanctions for environmental offences England and Wales
The Environment Agency in England and Wales will start using new enforcement powers, called civil sanctions, from 4 January 2011. Civil sanctions can be used against a business committing certain environmental offences, relating to harm to water resources, hazardous waste and packaging waste, as an alternative to prosecution. The new civil sanctions the environmental regulator can use against a business committing certain environmental offences include:
· Compliance notice - written notice to take steps to ensure that an offence does not continue or recur.
· Restoration notice - written notice to restore harm caused by non-compliance.
· Enforcement undertaking - voluntary agreement by business to take corrective action to make up for non-compliance.
· Fixed monetary penalty - a low level penalty for minor offences fixed at £100 for an individual and £300 for a company.
· Variable monetary penalty - a monetary penalty for more serious offences with a maximum of £250,000.
· Stop notice - written notice to stop an activity which is causing harm.
Legal action will be taken against anyone not paying monetary penalties, whilst anyone not complying with restoration notices or stop notices will usually be prosecuted.
· Compliance notice - written notice to take steps to ensure that an offence does not continue or recur.
· Restoration notice - written notice to restore harm caused by non-compliance.
· Enforcement undertaking - voluntary agreement by business to take corrective action to make up for non-compliance.
· Fixed monetary penalty - a low level penalty for minor offences fixed at £100 for an individual and £300 for a company.
· Variable monetary penalty - a monetary penalty for more serious offences with a maximum of £250,000.
· Stop notice - written notice to stop an activity which is causing harm.
Legal action will be taken against anyone not paying monetary penalties, whilst anyone not complying with restoration notices or stop notices will usually be prosecuted.
Corporate manslaughter update
The first case to be prosecuted under section 1 of the Act has been postponed a number of times and the trial will not now be take place until 24 January 2011.
Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings and its director, Peter Eaton, were initially charged with corporate manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter respectively following the death of Alex Wright in September 2008. Mr Wright, who had been employed by the company for a number of years as a junior geologist, was taking soil samples from inside a pit that had been excavated as part of a site survey near Stroud in Gloucestershire. During this exercise the sides of the pit collapsed, burying Mr Wright in soil. By the time that a rescue team had managed to reach him, he had suffered fatal crushing injuries.
The trial was initially listed for February 2010 but has since been pushed back on a number of occasions due to concerns regarding Peter Eaton’s health, with a judge commenting that it would be "unfair and oppressive" for him to participate in a trial at the same time as he required medical treatment. However, one can understand that the presiding court will be keen to avoid any further delays, given that the matter will have been delayed by nearly a year come January 2011. This is especially so given that it is likely a number of further prosecutions under the 2007 Act are awaiting the outcome of this first trial before proceeding.
If the company is found guilty of the charges against it then it could face an unlimited fine. In guidance finalised earlier this year, the Sentencing Guidelines Council recommended that the appropriate fine following conviction for corporate manslaughter will seldom be less than £500,000 and may even amount to millions of pounds. There is, however, a lack of certainty over the level of fines, other than the broad certainty that figures of £500,000 or more will be contemplated initially. How this will be applied to a relatively small company like Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings, which will be unable to pay a fine of £500,000, is yet to be determined.
In a hearing earlier this month, the charge of gross negligence manslaughter against Eaton has been dropped, due to continuing concerns regarding his health. While this allegation has been abandoned, he still faces a charge under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 in his personal capacity as director of the company, for which he could still face imprisonment if found guilty.
It is hoped that when the trial finally does go ahead it will clarify the extent and scope of the 2007 Act and, in particular, the practical interpretation of section 1 of the Act. It will be interesting to see what factors the court will take into account when deciding whether an organisation’s activities were managed in such a manner as to be causative of a person’s death. As mentioned above, it is possible that a number of future prosecutions under the Act in relation to currently ongoing investigations are waiting to see how the court applies the relevant parts of the statute.
Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings and its director, Peter Eaton, were initially charged with corporate manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter respectively following the death of Alex Wright in September 2008. Mr Wright, who had been employed by the company for a number of years as a junior geologist, was taking soil samples from inside a pit that had been excavated as part of a site survey near Stroud in Gloucestershire. During this exercise the sides of the pit collapsed, burying Mr Wright in soil. By the time that a rescue team had managed to reach him, he had suffered fatal crushing injuries.
The trial was initially listed for February 2010 but has since been pushed back on a number of occasions due to concerns regarding Peter Eaton’s health, with a judge commenting that it would be "unfair and oppressive" for him to participate in a trial at the same time as he required medical treatment. However, one can understand that the presiding court will be keen to avoid any further delays, given that the matter will have been delayed by nearly a year come January 2011. This is especially so given that it is likely a number of further prosecutions under the 2007 Act are awaiting the outcome of this first trial before proceeding.
If the company is found guilty of the charges against it then it could face an unlimited fine. In guidance finalised earlier this year, the Sentencing Guidelines Council recommended that the appropriate fine following conviction for corporate manslaughter will seldom be less than £500,000 and may even amount to millions of pounds. There is, however, a lack of certainty over the level of fines, other than the broad certainty that figures of £500,000 or more will be contemplated initially. How this will be applied to a relatively small company like Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings, which will be unable to pay a fine of £500,000, is yet to be determined.
In a hearing earlier this month, the charge of gross negligence manslaughter against Eaton has been dropped, due to continuing concerns regarding his health. While this allegation has been abandoned, he still faces a charge under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 in his personal capacity as director of the company, for which he could still face imprisonment if found guilty.
It is hoped that when the trial finally does go ahead it will clarify the extent and scope of the 2007 Act and, in particular, the practical interpretation of section 1 of the Act. It will be interesting to see what factors the court will take into account when deciding whether an organisation’s activities were managed in such a manner as to be causative of a person’s death. As mentioned above, it is possible that a number of future prosecutions under the Act in relation to currently ongoing investigations are waiting to see how the court applies the relevant parts of the statute.
Wednesday 10 November 2010
Changes to Health and Safety Laws from 6 April 2011
Corporate Risk Systems Limited (CRS) is committed to helping our clients and other organisations to prepare for and adapt to changes in occupational health and safety laws and practices.
HSE now implements changes that arise from within the UK on only two dates each year, and extends this to legislation arising from Europe wherever it is in their control to do so.
This statement lists the regulations that are due to commence on 6 April 2011. As a service to our newsletter subscribers, we update the list every 6 months.
Legislative Reform (Contained Use of Animal Pathogens) Order 2010 (LRO)
The proposed LRO will amend Section 1(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HSWA) to remove the restriction that limits the Health and Safety Executive's (HSE) legal powers to protecting human health. The LRO will extend the general purposes in HSWA to protecting against risks to animal health arising from work with animal pathogens and those pathogens not being adequately contained and provides the legal mechanism to enable HSE to make regulations in relation to animal pathogens.
A formal 8 week consultation ended on 28 March 2010
Amendment of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act (Application Outside Great Britain) Order 2001
The 2009 Variation Order was introduced to ensure that certain high risk offshore work activities (e.g. the construction of wind farms beyond our territorial sea) were subject to the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (HSWA). The 2009 Variation Order had a sunset clause until 5 April 2011. As such work activities are ongoing, and HSE is not yet in a position to introduce a new Order, a 2011 Variation Order is proposed to maintain the current position. The 2011 Variation Order will result in no additional costs to industry.
The Docks (Amendment) Regulation 2011
This is a proposal to remove the requirement in Reg 8(2)(f) of the Docks Regulations 1988 for a certificate confirming the safety of a vessel used to transport a person at work in dock operations to or from any working place in dock premises. It does not include vessels such as tugs and pilot boats.
A public consultation ended on 22 January 2010.
Pipelines Safety Regulations
The Pipelines Safety Regulations (PSR) 1996 provide for the management of pipeline safety and apply to all pipelines in Great Britain and to all pipelines in territorial waters and the UK Continental Shelf.
When the Regulations were introduced in 1996 there were some elements that were withdrawn from the Regulations that required further consideration, with the understanding that they would be provided for by way of amendments to the Regulations. Following a further review by HSE the proposed amendments to the Regulations went out to formal consultation which ended on the 1st March 2010.
An update on the proposed amendments is available.
The Health and Safety (Fees) Regulations 2011
Updates fee levels and allows for charging for conventional health and safety inspection (in certain circumstances) on Nuclear and COMAH sites and part of the Gas Transportation networks.
Monday 8 November 2010
USA, WASHINGTON, NOVEMBER 5 2010. ROYAL DUTCH SHELL, OTHERS PAY $236M IN BRIBE CASES
The companies fined are:
Royal Dutch Shell, which will pay a $30 million fine and disgorge $18.1million for $2 million in bribes in Nigeria.
Transocean, which will pay $13.44 million in fines and disgorge $7.2 million for $90,000 in bribes in Nigeria.
GlobalSantaFe, now part of Transocean, will pay a $2.1 million fine and disgorge $3.7 million related to payments to Nigerian officials.
Tidewater Marine, which will pay $7.35 million in fines and disgorge $8.3 million for $1.7 million in bribes in Nigeria.
Pride International, which will pay a $32.6 million fine and disgorge $23.5 million for $800,000 in bribes in Venezuela, India and Mexico.
Noble Corp, which will pay a $2.59 million fine and disgorge $5.5 million for $74,000 in bribes in Nigeria.
Shell's Bonny Island terminal in the Niger Delta. Some of the charges related to the company's Nigerian unit.
Shell's Bonny Island terminal in the Niger Delta. Some of the charges related to the company's Nigerian unit Seven companies - Royal Dutch Shell PLC, a big Swiss freight company, four oil service companies and a U.S. shipping firm - have agreed to pay $236.5 million to settle criminal and civil charges that they bribed foreign officials, the government announced Thursday. The companies were accused of paying customs officials in a dozen
countries millions of dollars in exchange for favorable treatment in customs duties, imports and taxes. In addition, they allegedly also paid bribes to get phony documents enabling oil drilling rigs to be brought in to countries. The companies agreed to pay $156.5 million in criminal fines to settle proceedings with the Justice Department, and about $80 million in
civil fines and restitution to settle related charges brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission. SEC officials said the agency's cases constituted its first "sweep" of a specific industry sector to crack down on public companies and third parties that are paying bribes abroad. Big oil company Royal Dutch Shell of Britain and the Netherlands, along with an exploration subsidiary, agreed to relinquish about $18 million in profits and interest. In addition, Shell Nigerian Exploration and Production Co. Ltd. will pay a $30 million criminal fine. In court documents filed in Houston, Panalpina World Transport (Holding) Ltd., of Basel, Switzerland, and its U.S. subsidiary agreed to criminal fines of almost $70.6 million. The company also will give up $11.3 million in profits to settle with the
SEC. Panalpina acknowledged paying $27 million in bribes from 2002 to 2007 to officials of Angola, Azerbaijan, Brazil, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, Russia and Turkmenistan. The oil service companies are Houston-based Pride International Inc., Swiss firm Noble Corp., and Transocean Inc. and GlobalSantaFe Corp., both based in the Cayman Islands. The shipping firm is New Orleans-based Tidewater Inc. The other countries involved were said to be India, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Mexico and Venezuela. The settlements marked the latest action in the government's efforts to combat overseas corruption in international business. The bribery charges were brought under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which makes it unlawful to bribe foreign government officials or company executives to secure or retain business. A number of U.S. and foreign companies have been charged with violating the law in recent years. "Bribing customs officials is not only illegal but also bad for business, as the coordinated efforts of law enforcement increase the risk of detection every day," SEC Enforcement Director Robert Khuzami said in a statement. "These companies resorted to lucrative arrangements behind the scenes to obtain phony paperwork and special favors, and they landed themselves squarely in investigators' crosshairs."
Also in the New Settlements:
Pride International agreed to pay about $23.5 million in restitution; the company and its Pride Forasol subsidiary are paying a $32.6 million criminal fine.
Tidewater around $8 million in restitution and a $217,000 civil fine. Subsidiary Tidewater Marine International: a $7.3 million criminal fine.
Transocean about $7.3 million in restitution. Transocean Inc. and Transocean Ltd.: a $13.4 million criminal fine.
GlobalSantaFe: about $3.7 million in restitution and a $2.1 million civil fine.
Noble: about $5.6 million in restitution and a $2.6 million criminal fine.
Royal Dutch Shell, which will pay a $30 million fine and disgorge $18.1million for $2 million in bribes in Nigeria.
Transocean, which will pay $13.44 million in fines and disgorge $7.2 million for $90,000 in bribes in Nigeria.
GlobalSantaFe, now part of Transocean, will pay a $2.1 million fine and disgorge $3.7 million related to payments to Nigerian officials.
Tidewater Marine, which will pay $7.35 million in fines and disgorge $8.3 million for $1.7 million in bribes in Nigeria.
Pride International, which will pay a $32.6 million fine and disgorge $23.5 million for $800,000 in bribes in Venezuela, India and Mexico.
Noble Corp, which will pay a $2.59 million fine and disgorge $5.5 million for $74,000 in bribes in Nigeria.
Shell's Bonny Island terminal in the Niger Delta. Some of the charges related to the company's Nigerian unit.
Shell's Bonny Island terminal in the Niger Delta. Some of the charges related to the company's Nigerian unit Seven companies - Royal Dutch Shell PLC, a big Swiss freight company, four oil service companies and a U.S. shipping firm - have agreed to pay $236.5 million to settle criminal and civil charges that they bribed foreign officials, the government announced Thursday. The companies were accused of paying customs officials in a dozen
countries millions of dollars in exchange for favorable treatment in customs duties, imports and taxes. In addition, they allegedly also paid bribes to get phony documents enabling oil drilling rigs to be brought in to countries. The companies agreed to pay $156.5 million in criminal fines to settle proceedings with the Justice Department, and about $80 million in
civil fines and restitution to settle related charges brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission. SEC officials said the agency's cases constituted its first "sweep" of a specific industry sector to crack down on public companies and third parties that are paying bribes abroad. Big oil company Royal Dutch Shell of Britain and the Netherlands, along with an exploration subsidiary, agreed to relinquish about $18 million in profits and interest. In addition, Shell Nigerian Exploration and Production Co. Ltd. will pay a $30 million criminal fine. In court documents filed in Houston, Panalpina World Transport (Holding) Ltd., of Basel, Switzerland, and its U.S. subsidiary agreed to criminal fines of almost $70.6 million. The company also will give up $11.3 million in profits to settle with the
SEC. Panalpina acknowledged paying $27 million in bribes from 2002 to 2007 to officials of Angola, Azerbaijan, Brazil, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, Russia and Turkmenistan. The oil service companies are Houston-based Pride International Inc., Swiss firm Noble Corp., and Transocean Inc. and GlobalSantaFe Corp., both based in the Cayman Islands. The shipping firm is New Orleans-based Tidewater Inc. The other countries involved were said to be India, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Mexico and Venezuela. The settlements marked the latest action in the government's efforts to combat overseas corruption in international business. The bribery charges were brought under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which makes it unlawful to bribe foreign government officials or company executives to secure or retain business. A number of U.S. and foreign companies have been charged with violating the law in recent years. "Bribing customs officials is not only illegal but also bad for business, as the coordinated efforts of law enforcement increase the risk of detection every day," SEC Enforcement Director Robert Khuzami said in a statement. "These companies resorted to lucrative arrangements behind the scenes to obtain phony paperwork and special favors, and they landed themselves squarely in investigators' crosshairs."
Also in the New Settlements:
Pride International agreed to pay about $23.5 million in restitution; the company and its Pride Forasol subsidiary are paying a $32.6 million criminal fine.
Tidewater around $8 million in restitution and a $217,000 civil fine. Subsidiary Tidewater Marine International: a $7.3 million criminal fine.
Transocean about $7.3 million in restitution. Transocean Inc. and Transocean Ltd.: a $13.4 million criminal fine.
GlobalSantaFe: about $3.7 million in restitution and a $2.1 million civil fine.
Noble: about $5.6 million in restitution and a $2.6 million criminal fine.
IOSH Approves the Unique CRS Risk-based Auditing Course
Corporate Risk Systems (CRS) is pleased to announce the approval by IOSH (the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health) of its risk-based auditing course.
The five-day course – called 'SHE Auditing – A Management Systems Approach' - is the only integrated management systems auditing course fully approved by IOSH. It is based on both ISO 14001 and OHSAS 18001, and is one of the best courses managers have ever attended – so say CRS's past delegates. It is suitable for external accreditation of Auditors and Lead Auditors after suitable practical experience.
Participants work as auditors to appraise the Health, Safety and Environmental Management System (HSE-MS) of Petros Barola Ltd, a fictitious but highly realistic case study based on the distribution department of an integrated petrochemicals company located on the Caribbean island of Barola.
The course is designed to introduce new and experienced auditors to a dynamic risk-based approach for assessing the effectiveness of any HSE-MS, including those based upon ISO 14001 and/or OHSAS 18001. It has also proven extremely beneficial for preparing technically competent line managers and supervisors prior to secondment to an audit team.
The intensive programme consists of a rich blend of tutorials, workshops and hands-on activities within the audit case study. Participants work in small teams, and each team is led by an experienced Lead Auditor. They prepare an audit work programme and have an opportunity to meet and interview a variety of Petros staff. Interviewees provide documents for the auditors to review, analyse and use as they would in a real audit. The culmination of the class is a presentation to the senior management of the company.
In addition to the open course dates offered on our website www.crsrisk.com, the course will be offered by IOSH as a part of its popular CPD programme. It is available as an in-company class for a minimum of six (6) delegates.
The tutorial team will be lead by Stephen Asbury, Managing Director of CRS and author of the book the best-selling course book ‘HSEQ Audits - A Risk-based Approach’ [ISBN 978-0-750-68026-4] which is provided to all participants on the course.
Participants who successfully complete the course work, and pass the moderated examination are issued with certificates by IOSH.
Monday 1 November 2010
Britain has the lowest rate of fatal occupational injuries in Europe
New figures released today confirm that Britain has the lowest rate of fatal occupational injuries in Europe and one of the lowest levels of work-related ill health.
The statistics published by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) show that in Britain between April 2009 and March 2010:
There were 152 workers fatally injured - down from 179 the previous year. This is the lowest level on record in Britain, with 0.5 deaths per 100,000 workers.
There were 26,061 major injuries, such as amputations and burns, to employees - a rate of 101.5 per 100,000 - compared with 27,894 in 2008/09.
There were 95,369 injuries serious enough to keep people off work for three or more days - a rate of 371.5 per 100,000 - down from 105,261 the previous year.
An estimated 1.3 million people said they were suffering from an illness caused or made worse by their work, up from 1.2 million in 2008/09. Of this, 555,000 of these were new illnesses occurring in-year.
A further 800,000 former workers claim they are still suffering from an illness caused or made worse by work.
Judith Hackitt, Chair of HSE said:
"It is encouraging to see further reduction in the number of people being killed and seriously injured at work. We now need to ensure that the improvements which are being made continue. Every statistic represents an individual or a family which is now suffering as a result of health and safety failings at work.
Britain remains one of the safest places to work in the EU and we are rightly proud of this record. The challenge now is to focus on those areas where improvement is slow to emerge. We know what good practice looks like but there remain significant areas of poor practice which still result in serious harm to people at work. These statistics also remind us yet again of the significant gains which are yet to be made in reducing the harm caused to people's health by work."
The construction and agricultural industries continue to report the highest levels of work-related injuries and ill-health, with disproportionately high numbers of incidents.
The toll of injury and ill-health resulted in 28.5 million working days being lost, an average of 1.2 days per worker - 23.4 million to ill-health and 5.1 million to injury.
HSE continues to take a tough line with employers who put workers at risk of injury or illness. It issued 9,734 enforcement notices requiring firms to stop dangerous activities or make improvements to the way they manage safety. It also took court action against the 1,026 most serious offences.
The statistics published by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) show that in Britain between April 2009 and March 2010:
There were 152 workers fatally injured - down from 179 the previous year. This is the lowest level on record in Britain, with 0.5 deaths per 100,000 workers.
There were 26,061 major injuries, such as amputations and burns, to employees - a rate of 101.5 per 100,000 - compared with 27,894 in 2008/09.
There were 95,369 injuries serious enough to keep people off work for three or more days - a rate of 371.5 per 100,000 - down from 105,261 the previous year.
An estimated 1.3 million people said they were suffering from an illness caused or made worse by their work, up from 1.2 million in 2008/09. Of this, 555,000 of these were new illnesses occurring in-year.
A further 800,000 former workers claim they are still suffering from an illness caused or made worse by work.
Judith Hackitt, Chair of HSE said:
"It is encouraging to see further reduction in the number of people being killed and seriously injured at work. We now need to ensure that the improvements which are being made continue. Every statistic represents an individual or a family which is now suffering as a result of health and safety failings at work.
Britain remains one of the safest places to work in the EU and we are rightly proud of this record. The challenge now is to focus on those areas where improvement is slow to emerge. We know what good practice looks like but there remain significant areas of poor practice which still result in serious harm to people at work. These statistics also remind us yet again of the significant gains which are yet to be made in reducing the harm caused to people's health by work."
The construction and agricultural industries continue to report the highest levels of work-related injuries and ill-health, with disproportionately high numbers of incidents.
The toll of injury and ill-health resulted in 28.5 million working days being lost, an average of 1.2 days per worker - 23.4 million to ill-health and 5.1 million to injury.
HSE continues to take a tough line with employers who put workers at risk of injury or illness. It issued 9,734 enforcement notices requiring firms to stop dangerous activities or make improvements to the way they manage safety. It also took court action against the 1,026 most serious offences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)