Fear of such reprisals can lead to the underreporting of incidents however, and the result can be that important lessons are missed. Highlighting the ability of some agencies (for example the Environment Agency) to apply legally binding civil penalties for certain offences, the APPG has called for a similar system for the work at height sector, encouraging ‘faster enforcement of regulations and… an improved culture of reporting incidents’. Whether this would occur remains to be
seen. This type of civil sanction has been considered and rejected in the past, amidst concerns that victims and their families would perceive it simply as big business avoiding its responsibilities by paying a fine. With some evidence too that the introduction of the Fee for Intervention scheme has brought tensions to Health and Safety Executive/ duty holder relations, the impact of such civil penalties would have to be considered carefully – an effective health and safety regime relies on collaboration between the two, not increased animosity. Whilst the public interest is often best
served by having a system that enables the regulator to achieve remediation or reparation, rather than proceed to a prosecution,
proportionality and transparency in any response is essential if public confidence is to be maintained. The aims of the proposals for enhanced RIDDOR reporting are to be applauded. However, the system is already difficult and, rather than simply add to this, a wholesale review of it may provide a better solution that is fit for purpose. It’s worth noting that the report also highlights the fact that those carrying out a regular task can become complacent and inured to the risk and potential consequences of a fall – the ‘it will never happen to me’ belief. Responsibility for safety and health is not an obligation exclusively on the shoulders of an employer however, and workers retain a duty to take reasonable care for the safety and health of themselves and others. Failure to do so and the assumption
of unnecessary personal risk can result in a fine and/or prison sentence for those at fault. The devil will, of course, be in the detail of any future reform of the Work at Height Regulations 2005, but in the meantime, organisations and individuals involved in such work must take note – ignore your obligations at your peril
Laura White is a associate in the health and safety team at Pinsent Masons
www.frmjournal.com JUNE 2019
21
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
