Monday, 26 October 2009
Non English Speaking Workforce
A campaign has been launched to inform Romanian, Polish and Indian construction workers based in London about on-site health and safety.The new HSE campaign wants to get the message across to workers from these communities about the role of the HSE in helping to protect them using existing law and making them aware that they have just as many rights to a healthy and safe working environment as indigenous workers.As well as employing Romanian, Polish and Indian outreach workers, HSE has produced health and safety information in different languages, for example wallet-sized cards which will be distributed among the communities. A dedicated phone line, web pages and an email address have been set up so workers can contact HSE with confidence.You can contact the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) by calling one of these Helpline numbers (English also spoken):- 0207 556 2181 - Gujarati - 0207 556 2206 - Hindi - 0207 556 2294 - Punjabi - 0207 556 2239 - Polish - 0207 556 2200 - Romanian Please note: All calls made to these numbers are confidential and you do not have to give your name if you don't want to.
Sunday, 11 October 2009
Training Offers
We are now able to deliver the following courses at your premises at a time to suit you:
- 1/2 day Appointed Persons First Aid Course HSE approved upto 12 delegates £450 + VAT
- 1/2 day CDM Awareness upto 12 delegates £375 + VAT
- 1/2 day Manual Handling Course upto 12 delegates £485 + VAT
- 2 hour Fire Awareness upto 12 delegates £285 + VAT
- 6 hour Health and Safety Foundation / Risk Assessment upto 12 delegates £475+VAT
Call Rob Anderson to discuss details/content/arrangements on 0208 651 1022 or e-mail info@rhssltd.co.uk
Wednesday, 16 September 2009
Firm Ordered to Pay more than £42,000 After Worker Injured
A Lincolnshire based company has been ordered to pay £42,631 after a worker was seriously injured after he was struck by a trailer.
Peter Borley of Limagrain UK Ltd endured serious back and chest injuries at the firm's Woolpit Business Park site after he was struck by a trailer on 27th March 2008.
The company admitted to failing to ensure the health and safety of an employee at Ipswich Crown Court on Monday 24th August and were fined £35,000 plus ordered to pay costs of £7,631. The incident occurred after a one-tonne trailer toppled over as it was being lifted onto a chasis.
Mr Borley suffered injuries to his ribs, vertebrae and sternum. Ruth Barber who was prosecuting for the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) said that workers had propped a refurbished trailer on its side, before trying to lift it on the its chassis using a forklift truck.
Even though Mr Borley was not involved in the move, he was struck by the trailer when it toppled over despite efforts to hold it back by the manager.
Results of an investigation by the HSE found a risk assessment had not been carried out, staff had not been trained for the task and that the straps used to lift the trailer were marked stating 'not for lifting'.
The company said in mitigation that they regretted the accident and had fully cooperated with the HSE's investigation and that in the past year they had spent £140,000 on health and safety. The company also described the accident as an 'isolated lapse' and had no previous convictions.
Since the incident, the company has introduced a policy of wearing high-visibility vests and has employed health and safety consultants to advise staff.
A spokesman for the HSE said after the hearing: "Cases like this highlight the need for all employers to ensure a proper and full risk assessment is in place.
"It is imperative work is carried out safely, and the HSE will not hesitate to take action against those who are in breach of the law and put people's safety at risk."
Peter Borley of Limagrain UK Ltd endured serious back and chest injuries at the firm's Woolpit Business Park site after he was struck by a trailer on 27th March 2008.
The company admitted to failing to ensure the health and safety of an employee at Ipswich Crown Court on Monday 24th August and were fined £35,000 plus ordered to pay costs of £7,631. The incident occurred after a one-tonne trailer toppled over as it was being lifted onto a chasis.
Mr Borley suffered injuries to his ribs, vertebrae and sternum. Ruth Barber who was prosecuting for the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) said that workers had propped a refurbished trailer on its side, before trying to lift it on the its chassis using a forklift truck.
Even though Mr Borley was not involved in the move, he was struck by the trailer when it toppled over despite efforts to hold it back by the manager.
Results of an investigation by the HSE found a risk assessment had not been carried out, staff had not been trained for the task and that the straps used to lift the trailer were marked stating 'not for lifting'.
The company said in mitigation that they regretted the accident and had fully cooperated with the HSE's investigation and that in the past year they had spent £140,000 on health and safety. The company also described the accident as an 'isolated lapse' and had no previous convictions.
Since the incident, the company has introduced a policy of wearing high-visibility vests and has employed health and safety consultants to advise staff.
A spokesman for the HSE said after the hearing: "Cases like this highlight the need for all employers to ensure a proper and full risk assessment is in place.
"It is imperative work is carried out safely, and the HSE will not hesitate to take action against those who are in breach of the law and put people's safety at risk."
Near miss as Winch Falls on Oil Platform
An investigation has commenced after a giant winch broke free and was dragged across the deck of an offshore platform.
The incident occurred while oil workers were testing the lifting equipment. The winch was lifting a heavy piece of equipment when it was wrenched across the desk. Luckily, two workers managed to jump out of the way of the winch and escaped unhurt.
The incident occurred on BP's Bruce Platform, which is located approximately 240 miles north east of Aberdeen.
A spokesman for BP said that they will be carrying out a full investigation and prevent a recurrence of an incident like this again from the lessons they will learn. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) have also confirmed that they will be investigating the incident.
This incident comes after a recent report demonstrated that accidents on North Sea rigs had fallen to a record low.
The incident occurred while oil workers were testing the lifting equipment. The winch was lifting a heavy piece of equipment when it was wrenched across the desk. Luckily, two workers managed to jump out of the way of the winch and escaped unhurt.
The incident occurred on BP's Bruce Platform, which is located approximately 240 miles north east of Aberdeen.
A spokesman for BP said that they will be carrying out a full investigation and prevent a recurrence of an incident like this again from the lessons they will learn. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) have also confirmed that they will be investigating the incident.
This incident comes after a recent report demonstrated that accidents on North Sea rigs had fallen to a record low.
Construction Firm Fined After Ignoring Prohibition Notice
A construction firm has been fined £8,500 plus costs of £9,526 after continuing to work on an unsafe excavation even though they had been served a prohibition notice.
JAS Truscott & Son Ltd. was refurbishing a house in Belgravia, London, and was excavating the property's ground floor. They had dug four three metre deep pits to create a basement.
During the basement's development, the company was advised by the local building control that their pits were not supported properly. However, the company continued to work, having received this advice and were subsequently reported to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).
The site was visited by HSE Inspector Kevin Shorten on 2nd June 2008, who noticed that two of the pits did not have any supports in place to prevent the sides from collapsing in. The remaining two pits had insufficient supports in place which were present on only two sides of the hole. They also consisted of a plywood backboard which was supported by a horizontal timber strut. The tops of the pits did not have any edge protection.
The company was issued a prohibition notice, prohibiting them from any further work to be carried out with immediate effect until the excavation was suitably planned, and edge protection was put in place. However, when Kevin Shorten visited again the next day, work had continued without any sufficient supports in place and a rope was being used for edge protection.
On 18th August, JAS Truscott and Son Ltd appeared at City of London Magistrate’s Court and pleaded guilty to breaching section 33(1)(g) of the HSWA for contravening a Prohibition Notice and received a fine of £6,500. They were also fined for breaching regulation 31(1)(a) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 for failing to erect proper supports and for breaching regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The company was fined £1,000 for each of these breaches and ordered to pay full costs to the HSE of £9,526.
The company mitigated that they didn’t have any previous convictions, and to ensure that the project was concluded safely, they worked closely with the HSE. They have since sub-contracted a specialist company to carry out basement work on their similar sites.
JAS Truscott & Son Ltd. was refurbishing a house in Belgravia, London, and was excavating the property's ground floor. They had dug four three metre deep pits to create a basement.
During the basement's development, the company was advised by the local building control that their pits were not supported properly. However, the company continued to work, having received this advice and were subsequently reported to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).
The site was visited by HSE Inspector Kevin Shorten on 2nd June 2008, who noticed that two of the pits did not have any supports in place to prevent the sides from collapsing in. The remaining two pits had insufficient supports in place which were present on only two sides of the hole. They also consisted of a plywood backboard which was supported by a horizontal timber strut. The tops of the pits did not have any edge protection.
The company was issued a prohibition notice, prohibiting them from any further work to be carried out with immediate effect until the excavation was suitably planned, and edge protection was put in place. However, when Kevin Shorten visited again the next day, work had continued without any sufficient supports in place and a rope was being used for edge protection.
On 18th August, JAS Truscott and Son Ltd appeared at City of London Magistrate’s Court and pleaded guilty to breaching section 33(1)(g) of the HSWA for contravening a Prohibition Notice and received a fine of £6,500. They were also fined for breaching regulation 31(1)(a) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 for failing to erect proper supports and for breaching regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The company was fined £1,000 for each of these breaches and ordered to pay full costs to the HSE of £9,526.
The company mitigated that they didn’t have any previous convictions, and to ensure that the project was concluded safely, they worked closely with the HSE. They have since sub-contracted a specialist company to carry out basement work on their similar sites.
"Appalling State" of Welding Equipment Resulted in Explosion
A motor engineer working beneath a vehicle suffered serious burns after a cracked hose caught fire.
The accident happened on 16th July 2008 at A1 Rewinds Ltd. in Aston, Birmingham when Mr Harjit Singh Matharu, an electrical fitter at the company was trying to remove a car exhaust. He was using an oxy-acetylene welding gun, that had not been properly maintained.
The hose, which transported the acetylene to the gun, had numerous cracks and the gas leaked out into an air pocket underneath the vehicle. When the gun's flame came into contact with the leaking gas, it caught fire and subsequently exploded, which sparked a fire underneath the car.
Mr Matharu escaped from underneath the vehicle and extinguished the flames, but still received serious burns. After being rushed to hospital for treatment, Mr Singh Matharu was off work for several months following his serious injuries.
Pam Folsom, the HSE inspector investigating the incident, said that it was "immediately obvious" that the hose had not been properly maintained since its first use 28 years previous. The equipment was condemned after it had been taken away for inspection.
A1 Rewinds Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching regulation 5(1) of the Provision and use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) 1998 at Birmingham Magistrates' Court on 24th April 2009. They were fined £2,000 and ordered to pay £1,500 towards the HSE's costs.
The company who have no previous convictions for safety offences expressed its remorse for the incident.
Inspector Folsom said: "The hoses were in an absolutely appalling state, totally perished, and had been shortened each time that a bend split the hose, allowing highly flammable gas to escape. The consequences of a gas cloud igniting beneath a vehicle, while a man is in the middle of that explosive mixture, are likely to be horrific.
"It is important for companies to ensure that they have fully considered all the risks their employees may face when using any equipment. The hoses were so obviously badly perished that there is no excuse for this incident."
The accident happened on 16th July 2008 at A1 Rewinds Ltd. in Aston, Birmingham when Mr Harjit Singh Matharu, an electrical fitter at the company was trying to remove a car exhaust. He was using an oxy-acetylene welding gun, that had not been properly maintained.
The hose, which transported the acetylene to the gun, had numerous cracks and the gas leaked out into an air pocket underneath the vehicle. When the gun's flame came into contact with the leaking gas, it caught fire and subsequently exploded, which sparked a fire underneath the car.
Mr Matharu escaped from underneath the vehicle and extinguished the flames, but still received serious burns. After being rushed to hospital for treatment, Mr Singh Matharu was off work for several months following his serious injuries.
Pam Folsom, the HSE inspector investigating the incident, said that it was "immediately obvious" that the hose had not been properly maintained since its first use 28 years previous. The equipment was condemned after it had been taken away for inspection.
A1 Rewinds Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching regulation 5(1) of the Provision and use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) 1998 at Birmingham Magistrates' Court on 24th April 2009. They were fined £2,000 and ordered to pay £1,500 towards the HSE's costs.
The company who have no previous convictions for safety offences expressed its remorse for the incident.
Inspector Folsom said: "The hoses were in an absolutely appalling state, totally perished, and had been shortened each time that a bend split the hose, allowing highly flammable gas to escape. The consequences of a gas cloud igniting beneath a vehicle, while a man is in the middle of that explosive mixture, are likely to be horrific.
"It is important for companies to ensure that they have fully considered all the risks their employees may face when using any equipment. The hoses were so obviously badly perished that there is no excuse for this incident."
Pre-qualification Process in Construction Set to Become Easier
May 2009 saw the official launch of a body whose aim is to reduce the burden on construction firms created by health and safety pre-qualification questionnaires. Its website was unveiled which contains comprehensive information for clients, consultants and contractors.
The Safety Schemes in Procurement (SSIP) Competence Forum was established in response to concerns from the construction industry and small firms about the over-abundance of pre-qualification (PQ) assessments and forms they were having to complete, which add significant costs and paperwork.
A recent report by the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) found that in order to compensate for the cost of unnecessary PQ activity, the construction industry would have to generate more than £1 billion in turnover.
PQ assessment providers are encouraged to maximise mutual recognition between their schemes by the SSIP Forum so that tendering for business work will only require one set of PQ documents in order to meet the stage one requirements of a wide range of construction clients.
John Murphy, the Forum chair said: "A major benefit for SSIP Forum members is that by tackling the cost and uncertainty surrounding pre-qualification, we can encourage far more suppliers, including SMEs to take part. This will widen market opportunities for SMEs and give more choice to clients."
Stakeholders have welcomed the Forum's step in the right direction to cut bureaucracy in construction. John Lacey, chair of the IOSH Construction Group said that this initiative would help "small and medium-sized businesses demonstrate they are competent in health and safety". The fact that an independent annual audit of the processes employed by each member scheme will be carried out, he added, "means industry can have confidence that the process of accreditation or registration carried out by a member scheme will be consistent and fit for purpose".
RoSPA said that they hoped the initiative "will be of value to other stakeholders, including insurers, investors, enforcing authorities, trades unions, and industry associations".
Brian Berry, the director of external affairs at the Federation of Master Builders believes that the initiative should particularly help smaller firms as the time-consuming PQ process has squeezed many of them out: “Local authorities, in particular, make it very difficult for SMEs, in terms of the types of questions being asked – they are geared towards larger contractors. Making it difficult for smaller firms means losing out in terms of the creativity and innovation they can offer. We need the Government to recognise that PQs are a major burden on small firms, and that we need more of this kind of mutual recognition – not just in terms of health and safety but also environmental and diversity issues, particularly in the current economic climate."
There is also concern that the Forum's success depends largely on the various PQ schemes that will join up. Paul Reeve, Head of HS&E at the Electrical Contractors' Association said that it is vital that more schemes join up and recognise each other: "Some leading schemes are not involved, and we are disappointed to see that they have not joined up. If it turns out that they do not then receive the full support of the construction industry, so be it."
Visit the SSIP Forum website
The Safety Schemes in Procurement (SSIP) Competence Forum was established in response to concerns from the construction industry and small firms about the over-abundance of pre-qualification (PQ) assessments and forms they were having to complete, which add significant costs and paperwork.
A recent report by the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) found that in order to compensate for the cost of unnecessary PQ activity, the construction industry would have to generate more than £1 billion in turnover.
PQ assessment providers are encouraged to maximise mutual recognition between their schemes by the SSIP Forum so that tendering for business work will only require one set of PQ documents in order to meet the stage one requirements of a wide range of construction clients.
John Murphy, the Forum chair said: "A major benefit for SSIP Forum members is that by tackling the cost and uncertainty surrounding pre-qualification, we can encourage far more suppliers, including SMEs to take part. This will widen market opportunities for SMEs and give more choice to clients."
Stakeholders have welcomed the Forum's step in the right direction to cut bureaucracy in construction. John Lacey, chair of the IOSH Construction Group said that this initiative would help "small and medium-sized businesses demonstrate they are competent in health and safety". The fact that an independent annual audit of the processes employed by each member scheme will be carried out, he added, "means industry can have confidence that the process of accreditation or registration carried out by a member scheme will be consistent and fit for purpose".
RoSPA said that they hoped the initiative "will be of value to other stakeholders, including insurers, investors, enforcing authorities, trades unions, and industry associations".
Brian Berry, the director of external affairs at the Federation of Master Builders believes that the initiative should particularly help smaller firms as the time-consuming PQ process has squeezed many of them out: “Local authorities, in particular, make it very difficult for SMEs, in terms of the types of questions being asked – they are geared towards larger contractors. Making it difficult for smaller firms means losing out in terms of the creativity and innovation they can offer. We need the Government to recognise that PQs are a major burden on small firms, and that we need more of this kind of mutual recognition – not just in terms of health and safety but also environmental and diversity issues, particularly in the current economic climate."
There is also concern that the Forum's success depends largely on the various PQ schemes that will join up. Paul Reeve, Head of HS&E at the Electrical Contractors' Association said that it is vital that more schemes join up and recognise each other: "Some leading schemes are not involved, and we are disappointed to see that they have not joined up. If it turns out that they do not then receive the full support of the construction industry, so be it."
Visit the SSIP Forum website
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)