[ Focus: Health and safety ]
required for specific areas of the site. If occasional visitors to the site are to be expected to wear eye protection, it is reasonable for the site to provide them with over-glasses or goggles. However, where there is no foreseeable risk of harm, there is no legal requirement to wear equipment that would protect a worker from that type of harm. The key question is: ‘If they have to have PPE, do they wear it when they enter a risk area?’
Myth 4: All staff are required to wear hi-visibility jackets, irrespective of the work they are doing This is similar to Myth 3, in so far as health and safety law doesn’t dictate that hi-visibility jackets should be worn at all times, but does require them to be worn in areas where they reduce the risk of injury. So, again, this will vary with the conditions onsite.
Myth 5: Electricians working on stepladders need to have someone footing the stepladder A case arose in a factory where an electrician was told by a health and safety consultant that a second person should be used to foot the stepladder. The important factor here is what is included in the agreed risk assessment and method statement – and that this is adhered to. Footing of ladders is generally considered a last resort, and shouldn’t be necessary unless the risk assessment identified a particular risk in not having the ladder footed. In terms of procedures, the health and safety
consultant should have taken the matter up with the duty holder, rather than with the individual electrician.
Myth 6: In-house health and safety training is not acceptable There have been cases of companies refusing to recognise contractors whose health and safety training is carried out in-house rather than through a third party. Main contractors need to ensure that their contractors are competent to do the work, but where a contractor can show it delivers practical, competent training to its operatives, this should not be overlooked.
Myth 7: Apprentices should not be allowed on site for health and safety reasons A perennial issue facing specialist contractors is that of providing on-site experience to young workers. Feedback from these contractors shows that access to sites is variable and that, in some cases, there are effectively bans on apprentices working on site. The ECA is currently liaising with both HSE and the UK Contractors Group (UKCG) on this issue. While controlling risk on site is paramount, this situation leads to practical problems for contractors and apprentices, and may even be a deterrent to employing apprentices – yet apprenticeships are
widely held to be essential for the industry. On-site experience is also a key component of providing relevant and effective training for apprentices. Accepting that apprentices on site may require
additional, relevant risk assessment and suitable risk controls, discrimination legislation tends to prevent outright bans or impediments to employment opportunities based on age.
Guidance and support
The ECA supports its members with extensive health and safety information and guidance. This includes telephone ‘hotline’ advice and a range of guidance, updates and presentations. The ECA continues to concentrate on helping members to deal with key health and safety issues such as risk assessment, asbestos and work at height. However, with the extensive use of health and safety pre-qualification questionnaires in the supply chain, practical support has been extended to free first- time Contractors Health and Safety Assessment Scheme (CHAS) pre- qualification assessment for members, discounted ongoing CHAS assessments, and a health and safety pre-qualification advisory service. Paul Reeve, director of Business Services at the ECA, says: ‘We have seen
a massive cultural and performance shift among our membership and, indeed, the industry itself over the last decade. On the way to improving employee safety as part of the successful Zero Accident Potential (ZAP) initiative (see graph), numerous ECA members have benefited from better productivity, and are more able to satisfy supply chain requirements.’ ECA group CEO Steve Bratt adds: ‘The JIB accident figures continue to
show significant improvements in the major and other accident rates. I commend ECA members who have helped our industry to achieve such a remarkable safety performance.’
More than 10 years of continual improvement: ZAP accident statistics
1800 1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300
ZAP starts
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
YEARS 2006
2007
2008
2009
ZAP ends 2010
2011 Figures collected by the JIB (2001 - 2011 inclusive)
RIDDOR: the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995. RIDDOR- reportable accidents refer to major injury and ‘over three-day’ reportable accidents. ZAP accident figures are based on the Joint Industry Board (JIB) survey conducted among ECA member companies with 31 or more employees. Provisional figures for 2012 show a further improvement on 2011. The JIB is a joint industry body comprising the ECA and Unite, the Union.
September 2013 ECA Today 59
ACCIDENT INCIDENCE RATE (PER 100,000 EMPLOYEES)
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68