These recent companies and directors could not prove they had everything in place when visited by a Health and Safety Executive Inspector.

Having proof is the only method of showing the Body Corporate or individual Company Director has done So Far As Is Reasonably Practicable.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) health and safety inspector makes thousands of visits each year covering various industries and sectors.

The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 Section 20 highlights the powers inspectors have. This regulation applies to every enforcing authority. 

The inspector will look at how you keep your workers and anyone affected by your workers healthy and safe.

They will ask about the health risks arising from the work you are doing. They will ask to see records and documentation to validate you understand your legal obligations and are doing so far as is reasonably practicable in preventing harm.

The inspector will need to see your health, safety and wellbeing records there, and then, they will not allow you to email them through or ask your representative to give them a call when they are less busy – They will wait.

The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 Section 33(1)(f) details that it is an offence for a person to prevent or attempt any other person from appearing before an inspector or answering any question.

The inspector will speak with your employees, contractors and other representatives during the visit to get an understanding of the working conditions, safety knowledge and control measures in place to reduce the risk to as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP).

So why do Companies and Directors fail?

Reading the above regulations may give rise to concern. Just before we present a simple and effective solution, let’s look at three recent failures (#1, #2, and #3) from UK Companies and Directors.

#1 Company fined after worker suffers the loss of thumb and fingers

Prosecuted 21st May 2021.

A 59-year-old worker was creating the mix for fish cakes at the Company’s factory in Grimsby.

At the end of a mix run, he cleared the mix from the machine, lifting an interlocked guard that should have stopped the machine from running. 

He put his hand into the machine without realising it was still running, and the augur caught his hand and drew his arm in up to the elbow.

The worker managed to free himself from the augur, but in removing his arm, his thumb and two of his fingers were severed, and he suffered serious tendon damage. Following the incident, doctors were unable to reattach his fingers, and he has not yet returned to work.

Failings:

Poor communication between the shop floor and maintenance and an inadequate fault reporting system was part of the inherent failures.

Breach and Costs:

This Lincolnshire Company pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2 (1) of the Health & Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The Company has been fined £787,500 and ordered to pay £33,443.68 in costs.

Read more on the case from the Health and Safety Executive press release here health and Safety Executive press release here.

#2 Automotive engineering company sentenced after an employee has an allergic reaction at work

Prosecuted 20th May 2021

An automotive engineering company employee was splashed on the face and upper body with metalworking fluid whilst cleaning out a grinding machine at a manufacturing site in Thatcham.

As a result of the contact, the employee had an allergic reaction, consisting of a very painful burning sensation, inflamed, broken and oozing skin, and was diagnosed with allergic contact dermatitis.

This is a permanent allergy, which means that even small quantities of this substance can result in a further serious reaction. The employee received medical advice that they could no longer continue in their job as it was a risk to their health.

Failings:

The Company had failed to carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment to identify the potential for exposure to hazardous chemicals. The Company had not implemented necessary controls to prevent skin contact. 

Breach and Costs:

A company pleaded guilty to breaching section 2 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. They were fined £100,000 and ordered to pay costs of £639.59.

Read more on the case from the Health and Safety Executive press release here health and Safety Executive press release here.

#3 Company and Director sentenced after two workers injured in falls from height

Prosecuted 17th May 2021

Newport Magistrates’ Court heard that workers on a six-metre-high scaffolding tower were carrying out demolition activities when the tower’s platform partially collapsed.

One man suffered broken ribs, tendon damage and, since the incident, depression and short-term memory loss. The other man suffered three broken vertebrae and has since been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation found that the tower scaffolding was unsuitable for the type of work being undertaken. It was not erected by a person trained and competent to do so, had been erected to a height above recommendation and was loaded with a weight greater than the safe working load stated by the manufacturer.

Failings:

The tower scaffolding was not suitable for the type of work being undertaken. It was not erected by a person trained and competent to do so, had been erected to a height above recommendation and was loaded with a weight greater than the safe working load stated by the manufacturer.

Breach and Costs:

The Company pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. They were fined £106,000 and ordered to pay costs of £8,501.

Also, the Director of the Company pleaded guilty to Section 33 (1a) by virtue of Section 37(1) of The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and was ordered to undertake 150 hours of unpaid work.

Read more on the case from the Health and Safety Executive press release here. Health and Safety Executive press release here.

FACT:  All breaches in health and safety happen when the Company or individual Director fail to prove they have done ‘so far as is reasonably practicable.’

The proof is vital!

Having proof is the only method of showing the Body Corporate or individual Company Director has done So Far As Is Reasonably Practicable.

Suitable and sufficient documentation, information, records and reports not only improve your workers’ health and safety but also supports data-driven decisions making you a more effective, efficient and compliant business.It’s also crucial to give an Inspector or Enforcement Office the proof needed for them to be comfortable in the knowledge the body corporate (Your Company) and the individual directors are doing so far as is reasonably practicable in meeting their health and safety obligations.

Remember; a failure to meet the required standards in health and safety not only increases your risk of prosecution but reduces your chance of winning any employee injury claim!.

When you are not able to provide suitable and sufficient PROOF: 

• The HSE Inspector will give you a notification of contravention,
• The HSE Inspector will give you an improvement notice,
• The HSE Inspector will give you a prohibition notice; or
• prosecute you for breaching health and safety laws.
• An injury claims solicitor will contact you based on the injured person injury claim.

The expense of failing to meet the required health and safety standards?

The HSE can prosecute you for breaking health and safety laws or for failing to comply with an improvement notice or a prohibition notice.

*The courts will fine, and in some cases, send responsible persons to prison.

Want to know the cost if an accident was to happen in your workplace?

Try our simple calculator below to see what an accident could cost you and your company

<img alt=”” data-id=”2169″ width=”317″ data-init-width=”315″ height=”262″ data-init-height=”260″ title=”fines-calc” loading=”lazy” src=”https://yoursafetypal.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/fines-calc.jpg” data-width=”317″ data-height=”262″ style=””>

Cost-Effective Prevention and Protection

Safety PALs SMART solution simplifies the proven ‘Plan, Do, Check, Act’ process to ‘Plan, Act, Learn.’

Safety PAL (Plan Act Learn) is different from all other systems, and it provides health, safety and wellbeing directly to your workforce – with proof.

All Safety PALs features synchronise, giving you on-demand and real-time proof, helping you and your company meet its legal obligations. Proving that you are doing so far as is reasonably practicable.

<img alt=”” data-id=”8454″ width=”799″ data-init-width=”1800″ height=”627″ data-init-height=”1412″ title=”Safety PAL Main Dashboard view” loading=”lazy” src=”https://yoursafetypal.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Imac-Mockup-v2.jpg” data-width=”799″ data-height=”627″>

Safety PAL Main Dashboard view with shields

The strategic business decision

<img alt=”” data-id=”8568″ width=”799″ data-init-width=”2102″ height=”124″ data-init-height=”326″ title=”thumbnail_Chain Link Small” loading=”lazy” src=”https://yoursafetypal.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/thumbnail_Chain-Link-Small.png” data-width=”799″ data-height=”124″>

24/7 access to all H&S records, maximising your resource

Reduce inefficiencies inherent with managing H&S

Compiling the proof needed to verify legal compliance

FACT:  All breaches in health and safety happen when the Company or individual Director fail to prove they have done ‘so far as is reasonably practicable.

Safety PAL system prevents accidents by guaranteeing that the workforce receives accurate and frequent updates based on discipline and competence and has read and understood all company policies and job information. 

Safety PAL protects your Company from civil and legal claims by collating employees training, competencies and job records in real-time, proving the Company is doing so far as is reasonably practicable.

Useful links, downloads and resource information

HSE web page when an inspector calls: https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/hsc14.htm

Regulation of health and safety at work: https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/hse51.pdf 

Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/37/contents

Office of Rail and Road. If an Inspector calls: https://orr.gov.uk/news-and-blogs/orr-blog/2019/an-inspector-calls