Minister orders second Löfstedt report          
   

Löfstedt has been asked by employment minister Chris Grayling to prepare a follow-up “mini-report” in the Autumn for publication by the end of January 2013 assessing progress in making his proposed changes.

“I have been asked to report on whether I am satisfied by the way the government is implementing my 26 recommendations,”. “And if I think anything else should be done.”

The recommendations from last year’s review, almost all of which were accepted by Grayling, included exempting some self-employed people from compliance with safety law, a review of core safety law to see if some common requirements can be consolidated and simplification of the HSE’s 53 approved codes of practice which guide dutyholders on how to meet regulatory requirements.

He said the team of researchers at the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) who helped with the review will reassemble later in the year to help him evaluate progress on the recommendations.

The challenge panel made up of representatives of unions business and the major political parties, which advised him on last year’s review will probably reconvene for one meeting.

The result will be a 10-page summary of progress submitted to the minister in January and then made public.

The first report suggested varying deadlines for the proposed changes such as April 2013 for the HSE to review the Work at Height Regulations and April 2015 to examine regulations limited to particular industrial sectors such as construction, to see if there is scope for consolidating them.

The suggested timescales were later shortened by the prime minister, who said in an article in London’s Evening Standard newspaper in January that he had asked for most of the recommendations to be implemented by the end of this year.

Löfstedt said he had not seen a proposed timetable from the HSE or DWP but said he understood ministers were keeping up the pressure to meet the end-of-year deadline. “It’s getting tighter and tighter,” he said

Can I incorporate a water risk assessment into a standard risk assessment?

Yes, a water (Legionella) risk assessment can form part of a general risk assessment.

But the water risk assessment has to be suitable and sufficient to cover the specific measures associated with control of Legionella, which are set out in detail in the HSE’s L8 code of practice. In brief, the assessment should identify where there are:

• suitable conditions for Legionella growth: water temperature of 25oC to 45oC.
• means of dissemination, such as showers or air-conditioning units, as the disease is contracted by the inhalation of contaminated water droplets.
• presence and nature of the people exposed. Old and infirm people are more prone to contracting Legionnaires’ disease.

A water risk assessment typically includes the schematic drawings of your water systems, the asset register, measures to control the risk and monitoring programmes.

Legionella assessments should be carried out at least every two years or when there is a significant change to the water system, and are needed for all commercial buildings with water systems, not just those with cooling towers.

Ensure there is proper training for anyone tasked with maintaining the control systems; it is good practice to provide employees with toolbox talks to understand the potential hazards.

Most organisations trust water assessments to specialists. Whoever is assigned the task must be competent and have sufficient experience, expertise and training in the systems.

Building sites found putting workers at risk

Almost half of the refurbishment construction projects in and around Stamford Hill in North East London have failed health and safety spot checks.

A day-long inspection initiative by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) last week (3 July) saw a small team of Inspectors visit 22 construction sites across North Hackney and South Tottenham, Haringey.

An example of a dangerous working platform several metres above ground

Enforcement action had to be taken at nine of those sites, with six Prohibition Notices served requiring dangerous practices to stop immediately, and six Improvement Notices served requiring safety improvements to be made. One site was completely closed down due to exceptionally hazardous conditions.

Five of the Prohibition Notices served related to unsafe work at height. Training and welfare concerns accounted for the Improvement Notices.

Mike Williams, Principal Inspector for HSE's construction division in North and East London said:

"Construction remains one of Britain's most dangerous industries and fatal incidents across London have shown how devastating they can be.

"We are very concerned at the number of small sites that are failing to take the most basic precautions to protect workers and members of the public. Good health and safety on construction sites is a legal requirement and we will continue to clamp down on dangerous practices or poor standards until the message gets through.

"Contractors must properly plan their work and protect their workers from risks such as falls from height or structures collapsing."

Common issues found during the inspections were:

• Basic precautions were missing, such as edge protection to prevent falls from height
• Work was not properly planned
• Poorly trained site managers
• Inadequate welfare facilities for workers

Worker's injury leads to court case for firm

A North Yorkshire firm has been fined after a worker became trapped by the head and neck in a packaging machine at its factory in Whitley Bridge, near Selby.

Cromar Building Products Ltd was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) for safety failings after it investigated the incident on 16 February last year.

Selby Magistrates Court heard (3 July) that Mr Glyn Addison was working on a packaging machine when a wrapping unit developed a fault that stopped it from correctly sealing polythene around rolls of roof felt on a production line.

Mr Addison squeezed past a table where the finished rolls were discharged and reached under the roll conveyor to free some packaging film from the machine. As he did, a ram pushing the rolls of felt on to the packaging machine moved forward and trapped him by the head and neck against the frame of the conveyor.

The court heard Mr Addison was quickly freed by a colleague who prised away the ram. However, he suffered nerve damage to his neck and shoulder area and has not returned to work since.

HSE discovered that the wrapping machine often blocked and operatives regularly accessed the machine by walking between gaps down either side of the discharge table.

It found that Cromar Building Products had failed to ensure that the machine could be effectively isolated so employees were unable to access dangerous moving parts. There was also no safe system of work for employees to follow.

Cromar Building Products Ltd of The Maltings Industrial Estate, Whitley Bridge, pleaded guilty to a single breach of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act l974. The company was fined £2,750 and ordered to pay £3,039 in costs.

After the case, HSE Inspector Helen Hennessy said:

"There is no doubt that this incident could have been avoided. It highlights the need for employers to ensure they devise and maintain safe systems of work, and that machinery is properly isolated before workers enter the danger zone.

"It was lucky that Mr Addison's injuries were not life-threatening, but if his colleague had not been there to release him quickly, the outcome could have been very different.

"Employers must provide adequate safeguards and ensure their staff are given the right information, procedures and systems to allow them to do their jobs in safety."

Two firms fined for Telford incident

Two companies have been fined for safety failings after an employee lost three fingers and part of his thumb.

The 37-year-old man, who does not wish to be named, had been working with another employee for O'Neill Concrete Pumping Ltd to pump concrete into a garden in Wrockwardine, Telford, on 27 February 2010.

When the job was finished he went to clean the hopper and lifted the automatic locking hopper grille. As he did, the swinging tube, which is part of the pumping mechanism, moved and trapped his right hand, crushing his fingers. He was taken to hospital and had three fingers and part of his thumb amputated. The employee needed extensive surgery and has been traumatised by his injuries.

During the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecution, Telford Magistrates' Court heard that Transcrete (GB) Ltd supplied the concrete pump to O'Neill Concrete Pumping Ltd. There were defects found with the machine supplied.

Following the incident Prohibition Notices were immediately served on two lorry-mounted concrete pumps owned and used by O'Neill Concrete Pumping Ltd due to the failure of the interlocking system on the hopper.

HSE found that O'Neill had failed to ensure that effective measures were taken to prevent access to dangerous parts of the hopper of the lorry-mounted concrete pump and that Transcrete had failed to ensure that it was designed to be safe when it was being cleaned or maintained.

O'Neill Concrete Pumping Ltd, of Wellington Road, Bilston, West Midlands, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and were fined £3,000 with costs of £2,000.

Transcrete (GB) Ltd, of Pool Lane, Winterley, Sandbach, Cheshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 6(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 for failing to ensure the concrete pump supplied was safe between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2006. They were fined £4,000 with costs of £2,000.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Guy Dale said:

"The employee will see his injuries every day and have to change the way he lives for the rest of his life. A safe, compliant machine and simple safety checks would have meant the incident would never have occurred.

"Both the supplier and user of the machine had a duty to ensure they were safe and that the critical parts were assessed and the appropriate measures were taken."

Ladders - pre use checks - things to look for

Every time you use a ladder you should do a pre-use check beforehand to make sure that it is safe for use.

A pre use check should be carried out by:

• the user;
• at the beginning of the working day; and
• after something has changed i.e. ladder dropped or moved from a dirty area to a clean area (check state or condition of feet).

The benefit of conducting daily pre-use checks is that they provide the opportunity to pick up any immediate/serious defects before they cause an accident.

1. Leaning ladders

Stiles need to be in good condition
Do not use the ladder if they are bent or split the ladder could collapse.

• Check the stiles
  Do not use the ladder if they are bent or damaged the ladder could buckle or collapse.

• Check the feet
  Do not use the ladder if they are missing or worn or damaged the ladder could slip.

• Check the rungs
  Do not use the ladder if they are bent, missing or loose the ladder could become unstable.

2. Step ladders pre-use checks - things to look for

• Check the locking bars
  Do not use the ladder if they are bent or the fixings are worn or damaged the ladder could collapse.

• Check the feet
  Do not use the ladder if they are missing or worn or damaged the ladder could slip.

• Check the stepladder platform
  Do not use the ladder if it is split or buckled the ladder could become unstable or collapse.

• Check the steps or treads
  Do not use the ladder if they are contaminated they could be slippery.

• Check the steps
  Do not use the ladder if the fixings are loose they could collapse.

• Check the stiles
  Do not use the ladder if they are bent or damaged the ladder could buckle or collapse.

Construction firms sentenced over worker's fatal fall

Two construction companies have been fined a total of £301,000 after a worker fell 22 metres to his death in Manchester.

The construction site where Christopher Heaton fell to his death

Christopher Heaton, from St Helens, was working on the Leftbank riverside apartments in Manchester city centre - part of the Spinningfields development - when he was dragged over the guardrail on a scaffolding platform after becoming entangled in a chain.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecuted the site's principal contractor, Amec Group Ltd, and steel-erection company Shawton Engineering Ltd following an investigation into Mr Heaton's death.

Liverpool Crown Court heard the 25-year-old suffered fatal injuries after falling approximately seven storeys on 29 April 2004. Another worker, who does not want to be named, was also injured and the incident has had a long-term psychological impact on him.

The court was told Mr Heaton had been using a chain from a scaffolding platform to adjust a steel beam three stories above him, when one of the supporting brackets gave way. He was struck by a falling steel block, became entangled in the operating chain, and was dragged over the edge of the scaffolding.

An HSE investigation into the incident found that the wrong studs had been used to secure the chain, and that the work had not been properly planned or monitored.

Amec Group Ltd was found guilty of breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety etc Act 1974, by failing to ensure the safety of workers, following a trial at Liverpool Crown Court. The company, of Birchwood Boulevard, Birchwood, Warrington, was fined £300,000 and ordered to pay £333,866 towards the cost of the prosecution on 29 June 2012.

Shawton Engineering Ltd, of Sankey Valley Industrial Estate, Newton le Willows, Merseyside, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(2)(a) of the same Act by failing to provide and maintain a safe system of work. The company, which has gone into administration, received a nominal fine of £1,000 with no costs.

Speaking after the hearing, Christopher Heaton's father, Len, said:

Christopher Heaton

"The loss of our son has completely devastated our lives. Nobody can imagine the impact his death has had. We have lost our only son who was the light of our lives, along with his sister Andrea.

"Chris was a good lad, with a happy go lucky outlook. He loved his job and was looking forward to a career in engineering.

"I used to worry about him all the time, especially when he was out at night. Ironically, I didn't worry too much when he was at work. I thought he was safe.

"After eight years, it is still hard to believe this has happened and, to try to put into words how it has affected us, is very difficult. I think we think about him more now than when he was alive.

"Chris would still be alive today if simple health and safety rules were adhered to, and hopefully lessons have been learned to stop this type of incident happening again."

 Neil Jamieson, HSE Principal Inspector for Construction, added:

"It is horrifying that Christopher Heaton was dragged off a scaffolding platform more than 20 metres high, causing him to plummet to his death.

"This was a major construction site, and the work taking place there should have been properly planned and managed.

"If either Chris's employer, Shawton Engineering, or the principal contractor on the site, Amec, had acted differently then his life could have been saved."