IN THE COURTS
HSE TAKES LANDMARK ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE PROVIDER
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has issued its first ever Prohibition Notice against an occupational health service provider, following findings that inadequate health surveillance was putting workers at risk of serious and irreversible harm.
The action marks a significant milestone in HSE’s regulation of occupational health provision and is evidence of the regulator’s focus on the prevention of ill-health. This enforcement sends a clear signal that substandard occupational health services will not be tolerated where they create real risks to workers’ health.
HSE inspectors found that the provider was delivering health surveillance through personnel who were inadequately trained, unqualified, and unsupervised. The ineffective surveillance meant that early signs of serious occupational diseases – including occupational asthma, dermatitis, and noise-induced hearing loss – were at risk of going undetected, leaving workers exposed to wood dust and noise without appropriate intervention.
A Prohibition Notice was issued to stop this activity on the grounds that it created a risk of serious personal injury.
HSE subsequently issued an Improvement Notice after finding that the provider’s health surveillance arrangements were fundamentally unsuitable. Inspectors identified a lack of competent occupational health oversight, inadequate clinical governance, no quality assurance processes, and no clear procedures for escalating adverse findings or reviewing workplace controls.
HSE Occupational Health Inspector Julie Wood said: “This is the first time HSE has taken enforcement action of this kind against an occupational health service provider, and
we have not done so lightly. It reflects the seriousness with which we view the quality of occupational health provision and our determination to act where substandard services are putting people in harm’s way.
“Health surveillance exists to protect workers from work- related health conditions that can cause permanent, life-changing harm. When it is carried out poorly, employers are given false assurance and workers are left unknowingly at risk.
“We expect occupational health providers to demonstrate genuine competence, proper clinical governance, and clear processes for acting on what they find. Anything less is a failure of the workers these services are meant to protect.”
Health surveillance is a legal requirement for many employers and exists to identify occupational diseases early so that appropriate action can then be taken to protect the affected worker and their colleagues. When health surveillance is carried out poorly, it creates a false sense of assurance for employers while leaving workers unknowingly at risk.
This case underlines the importance of occupational health services being delivered by competent, appropriately qualified professionals with robust clinical governance in place. Supporting employers to access competent occupational health services is a key part of HSE’s strategy to reduce work-related ill health, alongside ensuring that where health surveillance is legally required it is carried out effectively. HSE expects employers to satisfy themselves that the occupational health providers they appoint are capable of delivering services that meet legal requirements and help protect workers from preventable occupational disease.
HSE AUTHORISES CROWN CENSURE OF MOD AND PROSECUTION OF DEFENCE CONTRACTOR OVER FATAL TANK EXPLOSION
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has authorised a Crown Censure of the Ministry of Defence, and the prosecution of defence contractor Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land Ltd.
This action follows an investigation into a fatal tank explosion in Pembrokeshire in 2017 which killed two soldiers and left a third seriously injured.
Corporal Darren Neilson, 31, and Corporal Matthew Hatfield, 27, died when an L30 gun exploded on a Challenger 2 tank at Castlemartin Range in Pembrokeshire on 14 June 2017 and injured two other soldiers, leaving one with life changing injuries.
Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land Ltd was responsible for producing the Safety Case for the tank and gun, while the Ministry of Defence held ultimate responsibility for the health, safety and welfare of its soldiers, and for the suitability and sufficiency of the Safety Case.
11
Following an investigation by HSE inspectors, a file was passed to HSE’s legal services division for review, which in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors has authorised:
• A Crown Censure against the Ministry of Defence for failing to ensure the health, safety and welfare of soldiers, under Section 2 of the Health & Safety at Work etc Act (1974).
• A charge against Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land Ltd (formerly BAE Systems Global Combat Systems Ltd) for failing to ensure the health and safety of persons not in its employment, under Section 3 of the Health & Safety at Work etc Act (1974).
Neither the authorisation of criminal charges nor a Crown Censure represents a finding of guilt. No other organisations or individuals have been charged in connection with this incident.
WWW.TOMORROWSHS.COM
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
