History of The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974

Posted on September 19, 2015 by Nick Anderson

The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (HSWA), is the primary legislation covering occupational health and safety in the United Kingdom. The Health and Safety Executive is responsible for enforcing the Act.

The aim of the HSWA is to ensure practical compliance and help organisations understand and implement an ‘organisational intent’ to support health and safety. In particular the requirement for a health and safety policy enables the safety management structure to be publicised so all employees know how health and safety is dealt with.

For practical purposes, responsibility for the health and safety implications of work activity and employee welfare rests with the employer. The law also imposes duties on contractors, designers, suppliers, importers and manufacturers of articles and substances used at work, and employees. The self-employed have parallel sets of duties and usually interact with employers in the role of contractors.

The Health and Safety at Work Act is a pivotal piece of legislation, and try as politicians have to pull it apart, it has truly stood the test of time. Countless lives have been saved and many more workers have been protected from injury and illness because of it. As we look beyond its 40th birthday, we see an oft-imitated system that is the envy of the world.

But this success story, one of triumph of morality over hard-nosed profiteering, cannot be told without mention of previous generations and the many millions of people whose experiences brought it about.

It begins in 1800. Imagine that you are six years old and working in a cotton mill. There is an outbreak of malignant fever, which leaves many around you dead or dying. Physician Thomas Percival studies this and sends his recommendations to parliament.

The Health and Morals of Apprentices Act 1802, sometimes known as the Factory Act 1802, places orders upon cotton mill owners with regard to the treatment of apprentices (mostly children) and sets requirements for mill cleanliness.

Although the act was ineffective in its implementation, it did pave the way for future factory acts, which would regulate the industry. The factory acts were a series of acts passed by parliament to limit the number of hours worked by women and children, first in the textile industry, then later in all industries. This sets the backdrop to the eventual Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

Then, in the 1880s, we see the emergence of the production line. Imagine you are now a factory worker regarded by your well-heeled employer as little more than a component in a machine. It is consequently a monotonous and inhumane daily existence, which begins and ends just beyond the factory wall in a back-to-back terrace house without a garden, built cheaply and unsafely. The co-location of tasks in the process of production has arrived.

Next move forward three decades and across the Atlantic, from the Lancashire cotton mills to Henry Ford’s Detroit automobile plant. It is December 1913, and the eve of the first truly mechanised war. Your job at your work station is essentially one or two tasks on Ford’s rudimentary assembly line. Work is centred on repetition, fragmented experience and forensically monitored output. We begin to see an increasingly sophisticated division of labour. Perfection of this sequence resulted in the famous Model T Ford car.

Ford’s model of mass production was given its own name: Fordism. But the drive for increased production speeds resulted in a wide range of stress-related symptoms that became so familiar they also earned themselves a name: ‘Forditis’.

In the 1936 dark comedy Modern Times, Charlie Chaplin is the personification of the cog in a machine, a factory worker employed on an accelerating assembly line, where he screws nuts at an ever-increasing rate onto pieces of machinery. He finally suffers a nervous breakdown and runs amok, throwing the factory into chaos. He is sent to a hospital.

Worldwide the continued search for increased production line efficiency, coupled with the war time eras, resulted in a shell-shocked workforce. Remember time-and-motion studies? They have been in and out of fashion for many years. The aim was to find out who was working hard and who was not. But importantly they eventually raised the question of why? Did some work better when given a single small task to repeat over and over, or was frequent change of task key to reducing errors? Could it be that workers responded differently and acted as individuals?

Moving on through the post-second world war years and the civil rights movements of the 1950s and 1960s, we arrive at 1974 and the introduction of the Health and Safety at Work Act. You are now a female worker liberated by the drive for equality and emboldened by trade union membership. Autonomy has raised its head. People now want more control over the work they do.

Enlightenment, how can we make work better? We are not just talking about efficiency related to profit. Let’s change this assembly line to process thought, human need and emotion. Why would anyone adopt a job role which might do them harm? Of course, we can each think of many reasons why. So who was responsible for the health and safety of workers, and why?

Health and Safety at Work Act 1974

The truth of it is that the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 was an enactment that consolidated a lot of existing and rather piecemeal legislation. It was no coincidence that it was enacted during a year when there had been a particularly large number of deaths from work-related accidents.

In 1970, an Employed Persons (Health and Safety) Bill had been introduced in the UK, and that same year the Occupational Safety and Health Act passed into US federal law.

This move by the US prompted Harold Wilson’s Labour government, in its last throes in 1970, to establish a committee of inquiry, chaired by Lord Robens. With an eye on the latest American initiative, the committee would consider this country’s legislation. It was a substantial task.

Edward Heath’s new Conservative government gave a proposed debate on the adopted US bill no parliamentary time, preferring to wait for the Robens Report.

Duly published in 1972, the report concluded, to put it simply, that there was too much law. Lord Robens noted: “One of the reasons why there is too much law is that every time a new technical situation arises an external agency imposes a new set of detailed rules. But one of the fundamental points in this document (the report) is that the primary responsibility for prevention lies with those who create the risk i.e. the management and the men.”

The report was instrumental. Following Labour’s return to power two years later, the recommendations were substantially enacted with the passage of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

Looking back in 2008, Lord Grocott gave this glowing review of this pivotal legislation: “The record of the 1974 act speaks for itself. Between 1974 and 2007, the number of fatal injuries to employees fell by 73 per cent; the number of reported non-fatal injuries fell by 70 per cent.

“Between 1974 and 2007, the rate of injuries per 100,000 employees fell by a huge 76 per cent, and Britain had the lowest rate of fatal injuries in the European Union in 2003, which is the most recent year for which figures are available. The EU average was 2.5 fatalities per 100,000 workers; the figure in the UK was 1.1.”

Of course, the shrewd among you might also accredit the change of our infrastructure landscape as a contributing factor.

The act’s success is beyond doubt; the figures speak for themselves. But moving on to the present day, surely serious health and safety issues are no longer an issue? Unfortunately, that is not the case.

Today, imagine you are a call centre worker with a failing voice and serious back problems. The workstations and repetitive tasks may have changed – but Fordism is still alive and well. We have a service industry now overtaking the manufacturing production line of the early 20th century. Time-and-motion studies and target-driven performance indicators are still stifling employee health, safety and wellbeing.

There is much work to be done, but behind this historic tale of ground-breaking legislation and vastly improved statistics, there is also a personal story about you and me. The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 paved the way for a life in which we in this country can now hope and aspire. For example, my son wants to work for NASA, and why not?

Without such advancements in health and safety, we would not have the safe working environments that have paved the way for progress in technology, science and innovation. This system has protected and nurtured those innovators who have created a world of work with limitless opportunities.

Looking past law and regulation, putting aside employers’ duties and employees’ acts and omissions, the story is not only about saving lives but also of allowing kids to aspire to become an astronaut.

But there is a twist to this tale. If my son can aspire to fly to the moon, why do hundreds and thousands of parents continue to lose sons and daughters in factory fires and building collapses in the south Asian garment industry? And why are thousands in the UK still dying from occupational health exposures?

If we truly believe in creating a world of work that is safe, healthy and sustainable, there is still a great deal more to do.

We should be proud of this legislation. I am hard pressed to think of any other act that has been as effective as ours. We should not think twice about the ‘elf and safety press we get. Instead let’s focus our energies on what we have achieved, pool our knowledge and expertise on maintaining what we have, and help those who are not quite there yet. No one would argue with this message: everyone has the right to come home to their families healthy and safe at the end of the working day.

And everyone has the right to be an astronaut if they want to be.

Article shared from SHPonline.co.uk and written by Jane White, research and information services manager at IOSH.

Timeline of Health and Safety Legislation

Posted on May 2, 2015 by Nick Anderson

This timeline of health and safety legislation and events is shared from the HSE site.

1800

1833

HM Factory Inspectorate was formed

The first factory inspectors were appointed under the provisions of the Factories Act 1833. Initially their main duty was to prevent injury and overworking in child textile workers. The four inspectors were responsible for approximately 3,000 textile mills and had powers to enter mills and question workers. They were also able to formulate new regulations and laws to ensure the Factories Act could be suitably enforced. Despite serious opposition from contemporary politicians and employers, the factory inspectors were enthusiastic and were able to influence subsequent legislation relating to machinery guarding and accident reporting. By 1868 there were 35 inspectors and sub-inspectors, each responsible for a distinct geographical area. Changes to legislation during the period 1860 to 1871 extended the Factories Act to practically all workplaces and the inspectors took on the role of technical advisers in addition to their enforcement duties. Major technological developments, world wars and the changing nature of employment have provided a constant challenge to factory inspectors over subsequent years.

1843

Mines Inspectorate was formed

In 1840 a Royal Commission was established to investigate working conditions in the mining industry. The Commission’s findings published in 1842 made shocking reading. Accidents, brutality, lung diseases, long hours and highly dangerous and adverse working conditions were found to be the norm. Public outcry resulted and the Mines Act 1842 was brought into force. The Act allowed for the appointment of an inspector of mines and collieries and the first inspector, Hugh Seymour Tremenheere took up his post in 1843. Tremenheere had only limited powers under the Act but undertook many prosecutions, investigated the condition of the mining community and made recommendations for training managers, reporting of fatal and serious accidents and provision of pithead baths and suitable habitation for mine workers. In 1850 inspectors were allowed to enter and inspect mine premises and Tremenheere’s plans for a dedicated mining inspectorate began to be realised.

1893

The first women factory inspector were appointed

The Factory Inspectorate was formed in 1833 and for the first 60 years it employed only male inspectors. Alexander Redgrave, the Chief Inspector of Factories was opposed to the idea of women inspectors, saying in his 1879 annual report:

“I doubt very much whether the office of factory inspector is one suitable for women… The general and multifarious duties of an inspector of factories would really be incompatible with the gentle and home-loving character of a woman…”

After several years of campaigning by the Women’s Protective and Provident League, the London Women’s Trades Council and others and amid growing support in Parliament, the first “Lady Inspectors”, May Abraham and Mary Paterson were appointed in 1893. They were based in London and Glasgow respectively and earned an annual salary of £200. Much of their early work involved enforcing the Truck Acts, investigating women’s hours of employment and enforcing health and safety in laundries.

1895

The Quarry Inspectorate was formed

Prior to the Quarries Act 1894, the only quarries that factory inspectors were responsible for inspecting were quarries using steam power. The introduction of the Quarries Act 1894 extended the powers of the Metalliferous Mines Regulation Act 1872 to give inspectors the power to enforce provisions of notifying accidents, undertake prosecutions and make Special Rules. This lead to the establishment of the Quarry Inspectorate.

1900

1956

Agriculture (Safety, Health and Welfare Provisions) Act 1956

This Act introduced comprehensive health protection and safeguards for agricultural workers and for children who may come into contact with agricultural machinery, equipment or vehicles. It prohibited the lifting of excessive weights, outlined the general provisions that must be made for sanitary conveniences and washing facilities and stipulated requirements for first aid provision. The Act also laid down requirements for the notification and investigation of accidents and diseases. It was instrumental in appointing a number of inspectors with the powers to enter agricultural premises and enforce the Act.

1959

Nuclear Installations Act 1959 which established the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate

The investigation into a major incident at the Windscale nuclear site on 8 October 1957 lead to a recommendation from the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) that a body should be set up with responsibility for licensing future civil reactors in the UK. The insurance industry added pressure to the debate and in 1959 the Nuclear Installations Act was passed, setting in train the formation of the Inspectorate of Nuclear Installations within the Ministry of Power. Today’s Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) link to external website

is responsible for the UK safety regulation of nuclear power stations, nuclear chemical plants, defence nuclear facilities, nuclear safety research, decommissioning and strategy. Since 2 April 2007 NII has also been responsible for civil nuclear operational security and safeguards matters.

1974

Flixborough chemical plant explosion (28 fatalities)

On Saturday 1 June 1974 a massive explosion destroyed a large part of the Nypro (UK) Ltd plant at Flixborough, near Scunthorpe. Twenty eight people were killed in the incident and 36 people suffered injuries. More casualties could have been expected if the incident had occurred on a week day. Widespread damage was caused to surrounding commercial premises and residential housing. The explosion resulted from the ignition and deflagration of a huge vapour cloud which formed when cyclohexane under pressure escaped from a part of the plant used in the production of cyclohexanone and cyclohexanol. Her Majesty’s Factory Inspectorate investigated the incident (this was before the Health and Safety Executive was formed) and produced an interim report. Following on from this, a formal investigation into the circumstances surrounding the explosion was undertaken by a Court of Inquiry chaired by Roger J. Parker QC.

Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974

The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 was described as “a bold and far-reaching piece of legislation” by HSE’s first Director General, John Locke. It certainly marked a departure from the framework of prescribed and detailed regulations which was in place at the time. The Act introduced a new system based on less-prescriptive and more goal-based regulations, supported by guidance and codes of practice. For the first time employers and employees were to be consulted and engaged in the process of designing a modern health and safety system. The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 also established the Health and Safety Commission (HSC) for the purpose of proposing new regulations, providing information and advice and conducting research. HSC’s operating arm, the Health and Safety Executive was formed shortly after in order to enforce health and safety law, a duty shared with Local Authorities.

Health and Safety Commission established

The Health and Safety Commission (HSC) was formed when the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 received Royal Assent on 31 July 1974. HSC’s constitution and responsibilities were laid out in Sections 1, 10 and 11 of the Act and, according to the first HSC annual report (1977) included: “taking appropriate steps to secure the health, safety and welfare of people at work, to protect the public generally against risks to health and safety arising out of the work situation, to give general direction to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and guidance to Local Authorities on the enforcement provisions of the Act, to assist and encourage persons with duties under the Act and to make suitable arrangements for research and the provision of information.” Some of the key health and safety hazards which HSC was concerned with in its first few months included asbestos, construction, dusts, genetic manipulation, ionising radiation, lead, noise and vinyl chloride.

1975

Health and Safety Executive was formed

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) was formed on 1 January 1975 under the leadership of its first Director, John Locke. HSE’s remit was to undertake the requirements of the Health and Safety Commission and to enforce health and safety legislation in all workplaces, except those regulated by Local Authorities. A number of regulatory and scientific organisations transferred to HSE at this time, including: the Factory Inspectorate; Explosives Inspectorate; Employment Medical Advisory Service; Nuclear Installations Inspectorate; Safety and Health Division from the Department of Energy; the Mines Inspectorate; the Safety in Mines Research Establishment; the British Approvals Service for Electrical Equipment in Flammable Atmospheres; and the Alkali and Clean Air Inspectorate. One of the first tasks undertaken by HSE was the re-organisation of the Factory Inspectorate into a series of 21 Area Offices and 11 local offices, supported by Field Consultant Groups, comprised of specialist scientific and technical staff.

First HSC advisory committees established

The Health and Safety Commission (HSC) set up the first of a number of advisory committees during 1975. This was done with a view to drawing upon the expertise of industry and specialist organisations and in encouraging wide participation in the improvement of occupational health and safety. Advisory committees on the following topics were set up over the next couple of years: Advisory Committee on Dangerous Substances; Advisory Committee on Toxic Substance; Medical Advisory Committee; Advisory Committee on Asbestos; Advisory Committee on Major Hazards; Advisory Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations; Safety in Mines Research Advisory Board; and the British Approvals Service for Electrical Equipment In Flammable Atmospheres (BASEEFA) Advisory Council. HSC also consulted the Trades Union Congress (TUC) and Confederation of British Industry (CBI) for suggestions for additional advisory bodies. A full list of contemporary advisory committees is available.

1976

First HSC annual report published

The first annual report published by the Health and Safety Commission (HSC) concentrated on three strategic aims, namely: encouraging positive attitudes to health and safety in the workplace; developing better information about the cause and scale of hazards; and the review of section 1(2) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. The report also outlined the objectives of the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and Health and Safety Commission (HSC), the scope of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and policy development.

1977

Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations 1977 (S.I. 1977/500)

These regulations established the right of a recognised trade union to appoint safety representatives from among the employees it represented. The exception to this was employees of mines, specifically coal mines as defined by section 180 of the Mines and Quarries Act 1954. The regulations conferred number of powers to safety representatives including: “to investigate potential hazards and dangerous occurrences at the workplace (whether or not they are drawn to his attention by the employees he represents) and to examine the causes of accidents at the workplace”; “to make representations to the employer on general matters affecting the health, safety or welfare of the employees at the workplace”; and to inspect certain documents. Under the terms of the regulations, two or more safety representatives could request their employer to establish a safety committee. The regulations also outlined the terms for pay for time off allowed to safety representatives carrying out official duties.

1979

Golborne Colliery disaster (10 fatalities)

Ten people died and one person was seriously injured when firedamp ignited and exploded in the Plodder Seam at the Golborne Colliery in the Greater Manchester area on 18 March 1979. Firedamp accumulated following a breakdown in the ventilation system and it is thought that this was probably ignited by electrical sparking. The Health and Safety Executive’s Safety in Mines Research Establishment (SMRE) investigated the incident and made recommendations for improving both ventilation systems and intrinsically safe electrical equipment in mines.

1980

Control of Lead at Work Regulations 1980 (S.I. 1980/1248)

The Regulations stipulated that where employees are exposed to lead in the workplace, employers or those who are self-employed must assess the work in order to establish the nature and degree of the exposure to lead. Employers are also required to provide information, training and instruction to exposed workers. Other requirements under the Regulations included: ensuring control measures are in place for material, plant and processes and that these are properly maintained; providing washing and changing facilities and areas for employees to eat, drink and smoke; avoiding the spread of contamination; cleaning; air monitoring; and conducting medical surveillance and biological tests. For more information about lead, see the Lead pages on the HSE Website.

Notification of Accidents and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1980 (S.I. 1980/637)

The Notification of Accidents and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1980 (NADOR) required employers and the self- employed to keep a record of any accidents or certain types of dangerous occurrences and report these to HSE. The Regulations include lists of the types of dangerous occurrences that are reportable, including those that occur in any situation and those that relate specifically to mines, quarries and railways. Today, the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulation 1995 (RIDDOR) has replaced NADOR. For more information about what is reportable under RIDDOR and what employers, employees, the self employed and gas suppliers and fitters are obliged to do under the Regulations, please visit the RIDDOR pages on the HSE Website.

1981

Health and Safety (First Aid) Regulations 1981 (S.I. 1981/917)

These Regulations which came into force on 1st July 1982 stipulated that “an employer shall provide or ensure that there are provided, such equipment and facilities as are adequate and appropriate in the circumstances for enabling first aid to be rendered to his employees if they are injured or become ill at work.” Employers were also required to inform employees about the arrangements in place for providing first-aid, including the location of facilities, personnel and equipment. Self-employed people were also covered by the Regulations as there was a requirement for them to provide appropriate and adequate equipment for rendering first aid to themselves at work, if necessary.

1983

150th anniversary of HM Factory Inspectorate

Today, HSE’s factory inspectors are based in the Field Operations Directorate. For more information, see the ‘1990: Field Operations Directorate was formed’ entry. Information about the origins and development of the Factory Inspectorate can be accessed via the ‘1833: HM Factory Inspectorate was formed’ entry.

HSE starts to enforce asbestos licensing industry

The Health and Safety Commission’s Advisory Committee on Asbestos reached agreement on two European Union directives concerning protection of workers exposed to asbestos and the marketing and use of asbestos. This agreement, based on medical evidence and research on engineering controls resulted in the development of the Asbestos (Licensing) Regulations 1983 which came into force on 1 August 1984.

Asbestos (Licensing) Regulations 1983 (S.I. 1983/1649)

The Asbestos (Licensing) Regulations 1983 came into force on 1 August and have been amended by several pieces of legislation in the intervening years. At the time the Regulations became law, no-one could carry out work with asbestos insulation including asbestos insulation board or asbestos coating unless they held a licence granted by HSE or worked for someone who held such a licence. There were three exemptions to the requirements, namely: collecting samples or air monitoring to identify asbestos; work carried out with asbestos insulation, asbestos insulating board or asbestos coating by employers or the self-employed, either by themselves or by using their own employees and in their own premises; and work of short duration using these materials. For more information about present day requirements for working with asbestos, please visit the Asbestos pages on the HSE Website.

HSE starts to enforce genetic manipulation regulations

HSE assumed responsibility for enforcing the Health and Safety (Genetic Manipulation) Regulations 1978 from the Department of Education and Science in 1983. In March 1984 a new Advisory Committee on Genetic Manipulation (ACGM) was set up to support this new role. In its first year, ACGM set up working parties to investigate: the release of genetically manipulated organisms for agricultural and environmental purposes; the uses of viruses in genetic manipulation, including the use of recombinants containing potentially harmful nucleic acid sequences; and monitoring of workers involved in genetic manipulation work. In 2004, ACGM was replaced by the Scientific Advisory Committee on Genetic Modification (Contained Use), (SACGM(CU)). SACGM(CU) provides technical and scientific advice to the UK Competent Authority on all aspects of the human and environmental risks of the contained use of genetically modified organisms.

1984

HSE starts to enforce domestic gas safety

HSE assumed responsibility for mains gas safety functions on 1 February 1984, taking over from the Department of Energy. This involves responsibility for the safety of gas mains in the home as well as the workplace. HSE was given the power to introduce gas safety regulations under the Gas Act 1972 and enforce safety regulations made under this Act. Now HSE and local authorities have joint enforcement responsibilities under the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 and are responsible for preventing injury to consumers and the public from either fire and explosion or carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning. More information is available on the Gas health and safety law and enforcementwebsite.

Abbeystead pumping station (16 fatalities)

An explosion occurred at a subterranean valve house in the Lune/Wyre Water Transfer Scheme at Abbeystead in Lancashire on 23 May 1984. Sixteen people were killed and 28 injured whilst taking part in an evening visit at the site. The visit was part of a programme to demonstrate to local residents that their fears that the Transfer Scheme would cause winter flooding were unfounded. The explosion occurred while water was being pumped over the weir into the river Wyre. The valve house was severely damaged during the incident. HSE investigated and concluded that the explosion was caused by ignition of a mixture of methane and air which had built up in the wet room of Abbeystead Valve House. The source of the ignition was not identified. HSE also contacted water authorities and alerted them to the potential dangers of water transfer and comparable systems where methane could pose a serious risk.

Control of Industrial Major Accident Hazard Regulations 1984 (S.I. 1984/1902)

The Regulations, known as CIMAH, require that safe operation can be demonstrated for industrial activities in which various substances as defined in Schedule I of the Regulations are involved. They also set out requirements for isolated storage of substances in Schedule 2 of the Regulations. Under the Regulations, manufacturers are required to provide written evidence that major accident hazards have been identified and the necessary steps put in place to prevent major incidents and protect workers on the site. They also are required to prepare an off-site emergency plan to complement the Local Authority emergency plan and to provide information to the Local Authority which can be used to inform people living in the locality who might be affected by a CIMAH site.

1985

Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1985 (S.I. 1985/2023)

The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1985, commonly known as ‘RIDDOR’, require a ‘responsible person’ to notify the enforcing authority where a person dies or sustains any injuries or specific medical conditions or where a dangerous occurrence takes place in connection with a work activity. The Regulations set out the specific injuries which are reportable including fractures, amputation, decompression sickness and others. A list of the dangerous occurrences reportable under RIDDOR is provided in Schedule 1 of the Regulations, while a second schedule sets out reportable diseases under RIDDOR. Separate notification requirements for mines, quarries and railways are also explained.

Putney domestic gas explosion (8 fatalities)

Eight residents were killed in a major explosion which occurred on 10 January 1985 at a block of luxury flats in Newnham House, Manor Fields, Putney, South London. HSE worked with investigation teams from the British Gas Corporation, South Eastern Gas, Midland Research Station, the London Borough of Wandsworth and the police and fire authority to ascertain the cause of the incident. Investigations revealed the explosion was caused by gas leaking into the building from a crack in the cast iron pipe that formed the gas main. The crack had been caused by uneven loading on the pipe due to differential settlement. HSE made a number of recommendations regarding the safety of gas mains, one of the key ones being for the British Gas Corporation to review its priorities for replacing cast iron gas mains.

HSE starts to enforce transport of dangerous goods by road safety

Legislation surrounding the regulation of dangerous goods has been subject to many changes since HSE began enforcing The Dangerous Substances (Conveyance by Road in Packages) Regulations 1986 (PGR). Today HSE is one of the organisations responsible for enforcing The Carriage of Dangerous Goods and Use of Transportable Pressure Receptacles Regulations 2009 (CDG 2009). More information about HSE’s role in this area can be found in the Dangerous Goods manual.

Fire at Bradford City Football Stadium – Valley Parade

Fifty six people died and approximately 256 were injured when a serious fire broke out in the main stand at Valley Parade, the home ground of Bradford City Football Club, on Saturday 11 May 1985. HSE investigated this incident, described as the worst fire disaster in the history of British football. Forensic tests concluded that the fire was probably started by a dropped match or a cigarette stubbed out in a polystyrene cup. The old wooden stands that had been in place for decades at the ground contributed to the ferocity of the fire. The disaster prompted a review of the UK’s sports grounds and stadia, resulting in legislative changes.

Ionising Radiations Regulations 1985 (1985 No 1333)

The Ionising Radiations Regulations 1985 applied to any work with ionising radiation except work carried out under section 1 of the Nuclear Installations Act 1965 and in certain activities as outlined in Schedule 3 of the Regulations. The Regulations set out legal duties in the following areas: dose limitation including restriction of exposure; designation of controlled areas and of classified persons; appointment of qualified persons; training and instruction requirements; dosimetry and medical surveillance; control of radioactive substances including arrangements for personal protective equipment and washing and changing facilities; assessment of hazards; investigation of cases of overexposure; and fees for medical examinations.

1986

HSE starts to enforce pesticide safety

The Control of Pesticides Regulations 1986 (S.I. 1986/1510) conferred authority on HSE to enforce pesticide safety. The Regulations provided a detailed list of those types of pesticides which are subject to control and those which are excluded. They also outlined the approvals required before any pesticides could be sold, stored, used, supplied or advertised. In addition, the Regulations set out the general conditions for pesticides regarding sale, supply, storage, advertisement and use, including aerial application. The Regulations were superseded by the Control of Pesticides Regulations 1997 (S.I. 1997/188). More information about HSE’s role in enforcing pesticides safety can be found on the HSE Website.

1987

Control of Asbestos at Work Regulations 1987 (S.I. 1987/2115 )

These regulations stipulate that an employer ‘shall not carry out any work which exposes or is liable to expose any of his employees to asbestos unless either a) before commencing that work he has identified, by analysis or otherwise, the type of asbestos involved in the work; or b) he has assumed that the asbestos is crocidolite or amosite and for the purposes of the Regulations has treated it accordingly’. Under the Regulations, employers must notify the enforcing authority of work with asbestos in certain circumstances. They must also provide information, instruction and training for employees who are liable to be exposed to asbestos during the course of their work. Adequate control measures must be in place and must be adequately maintained to prevent or reduce the spread of asbestos. Other requirements of the regulations include: ensuring cleanliness of plant and premises; designation of areas where asbestos is present; air monitoring including associated record-keeping; medical surveillance and keeping health records; provision of washing and changing facilities; and storage and labelling of raw asbestos and asbestos waste.

Kings Cross underground station fire (31 fatalities)

The King’s Cross underground station fire occurred on 18 November 1987. Thirty one people died and many more were injured. The fire started when a lighted match which was dropped by a passenger on one of the station’s escalators fell through a gap between the treads and skirting boards and set fire to grease and dust that had been allowed to accumulate. The resulting fire spread rapidly, accompanied by thick black smoke. As London Underground’s practice was to call the Fire Brigade only when a fire seemed to be getting out of hand, by the time the Fire Brigade arrived, the fire was widespread and out of control. There were no smoke detectors in place in the station and only a manual water spray system. The Fennell Inquiry report noted that the London Underground staff members on duty were poorly trained and “woefully inequipped to meet the emergency that arose”. Following the incident, London Underground and the other organisations involved in the incident accepted 157 recommendations for safety improvements outlined in the official report.

1988

Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations (S.I. 1988/1657 )

The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations, generally referred to as the COSHH Regulations, were introduced to protect the health of people arising from work activities. Under the Regulations, employers must carry out a risk assessment to ensure that employees are not exposed to substances which will be hazardous to their health. Where exposure to such substances cannot be prevented, employers must provide suitable protective equipment and control measures and they must ensure that such equipment is adequately maintained, examined and tested and the results of tests recorded and kept. RIDDOR stipulates a requirement for monitoring exposure in the workplace and maintaining suitable records. It also sets out requirements for health surveillance and medical surveillance. Employers are also obliged to ensure that where exposure to hazardous substance is unavoidable, workers are made aware of the associated health risks and the precautions that should be taken including any associated instruction and training requirements.

Clapham train crash (35 fatalities)

A major rail accident occurred on the morning of 12 December 1988 at Clapham junction when two commuter trains collided and were subsequently hit by a third empty train. Thirty five people died in the accident and many other passengers sustained injuries. The Inquiry into the collision concluded that the main cause was ‘wiring issues’ and it laid the blame on British Rail work practices. The Inquiry also made 93 recommendations for safety improvements to be made. These included a limit to the hours that signalmen should be allowed to work and a system of automatic train protection (ATP) to be installed.

Piper Alpha oil installation fire and explosion (167 fatalities)

A series of catastrophic explosions occurred on the Piper Alpha offshore platform on the evening of 6 July 1988. This lead to a major and sustained gas fire which resulted when the Tartan gas riser ruptured. The majority of the emergency systems including the fire water system failed to operate and the resulting fierce fires and dense smoke made evacuation by helicopter or lifeboats impossible. Structural collapse of the platform quickly followed, causing many of the offshore workers to jump into the sea. Of the 226 people on board the Piper Alpha platform, 165 died and two members of the ‘Sandhaven’s’ fire rescue craft lost their lives. The Lord Cullen inquiry into the incident made a series of recommendations for the future regulation of the offshore installations and appointed the Health and Safety Executive as a single regulatory body to enforce occupational health and safety in the offshore oil and gas industry.

1989

Noise at Work Regulations 1989 (S.I. 1989/1790 )

The Noise at Work Regulations 1989 stipulate that ‘Every employer shall reduce the risk of damage to the hearing of his employees from exposure to noise to the lowest level reasonably practicable’. To this end, the Regulations require that a noise assessment should be made if employees are likely to be exposed to the first action level or above or to the peak action level of noise. The assessment should be reviewed as appropriate and adequate assessment records kept. Where employees are exposed to noise, adequate ear protection must be provided and ear protection zones set up where necessary. Any equipment provided must be carefully maintained and used and employees should be given information on the steps they can take to protect their hearing in the workplace. The Regulations also outline the particular modifications of the duties of manufacturers of articles for use at work and articles of fairground equipment in relation to the Regulations.

Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 (S.I. 1989/635)

The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 had a wide remit, covering: work systems, protective equipment and work activities; adverse or hazardous environments; capability and strength of electrical equipment; earthing and other suitable precautions; electrical protection, insulation and placing of conductors; connections; integrity of conductors; cutting off electrical supply and isolation; working on dead equipment; working on or in the vicinity of live conductors; working space, lighting and access; and competent persons. A section of the Regulations applied only to Mines, covering areas such as: introduction of electrical equipment; restrictions in certain underground zones; provisions associated with the presence of firedamp; approval of certain equipment in safety-lamp mines; cutting off electricity to circuits underground; oil-filled equipment; electric shock notices; information and records; use of battery-powered locomotives and vehicles into safety-lamp mines; and storage, transfer and charging of electrical storage batteries.

More information on the regulations

Hillsborough disaster

The Hillsborough Stadium disaster in which 96 people were killed and 170 injured was one of Britain’s worst sporting disasters. The disaster occurred on 15 April 1989 at the Hillsborough football stadium during the FA Cup semi-final match between Nottingham Forest and Liverpool. Football fans were caught up in a massive crush which occurred as a result of too many Liverpool fans being let into a full stand at the Leppings Lane end of the stadium. The resulting surge of fans gaining access to the ground caused the fans already inside the ground to be pushed against the wire safety fences and crushed. Lord Justice Taylor’s official Inquiry into the disaster led to many new safety measures being introduced to sporting stadia.

1990

HSE starts to enforce rail safety

Responsibility for railway safety passed from the Department of Transport to HSE in 1990. This took place because the Department of Transport’s Railway Inspectorate was heavily criticised for their poor protection of rail passengers and for not employing modern risk assessment techniques. The transfer was also seen as beneficial because it passed the responsibility for safety to the main Government health and safety regulator and away from the transport industry’s representative government department. The privatisation of British Rail during the period 1993 to 1996 saw a hundred companies taking charge of the rail industry. HSE introduced a new regulatory framework to manage the challenges to railway safety culture and risk management that took place during this period. The key components of the regulatory framework included new safety cases and permissioning regimes. From 1 April 2006 the Railway Inspectorate moved to the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR). More information about HSE’s role in regulating the health and safety of the railway industry can be found in ‘A farewell to trains PDF

‘

HSE starts to carry out nuclear safety research

Responsibility for nuclear research passed from the Department of Energy to the Health and Safety Commission (HSC) on 1 April 1990. The Nuclear Safety Research Management Unit (NSRMU) was established to manage the nuclear safety research programme on behalf of HSC. Its work was reviewed by the Advisory Committee on Safety in Nuclear Installations’ (ACSNI) Subcommittee on Research. ACSNI was particularly concerned with the reductions in nuclear research among the current nuclear licensees due to commercial pressures, and consequently stressed the need for HSC to support key areas of nuclear research. ACSNI recommended that more research into the effects of nuclear plant ageing, human factors and future reactor designs would be beneficial. It also welcomed the fact that HSC’s research programme was being opened up to competition and that customer-contractor arrangements were being strengthened to ensure better targeting of research priorities.

1991

HSE starts to enforce offshore safety

HSE’S Offshore Division was established at the recommendation of Lord Cullen’s Inquiry into the Piper Alpha offshore explosion in 1988. This change in responsibility brought about a shift in emphasis for the industry as prescriptive regulations which set specific requirements on duty holders were replaced by goal-setting regulations. One of the main requirements of the new regime was the introduction of a safety case system in which each installation is required to demonstrate that major hazards are adequately controlled and that a suitable management system is in place. Safety cases are submitted to HSE for approval and approval must be obtained before an offshore company is allowed to operate on the UK continental shelf. Today’s challenge for the offshore industry and for HSE is to manage the integrity of an ageing infrastructure while improving health and safety for the offshore workforce.

More information about HSE’s Offshore Division

1992

‘Six pack’ regulations

Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 (S.I. 1992/3004 )

These wide ranging Regulations were laid before Parliament on 8 December 1992 and came into force on 1 January 2003. The Regulations apply to the majority of workplaces and cover many workplace issues. These include: maintenance of workplaces and of equipment, devices and systems; ventilation; indoor workplace temperature; lighting; cleanliness and waste materials; room dimensions and space; workstations and seating; conditions of floors and traffic routes; falls or falling objects; windows and transparent / translucent doors, gates and walls; windows, skylights and ventilators; safe cleaning of windows; planning traffic routes; doors and gates; escalators and moving walkways; sanitary conveniences; washing facilities; drinking water; accommodation for clothing; and facilities for changing clothing, resting and eating meals.

Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992 (S.I. 1992/2793 )

The Regulations required employers to ensure ‘so far as is reasonably practicable that employees should not be asked to carry out manual handling work where there is a risk of being injured. Where such work is necessary, employers were required to make an assessment of the risks involved, take any appropriate steps required to ensure that risks are kept to a minimum, and provide employers undertaking such work with information about the weight of each load and the heaviest side of any load which has a non-centrally positioned centre of gravity. Schedule 1 of the Regulations outlined the factors that employers should take into account when carrying out an assessment of the risks associated with manual handling tasks.

The Health and Safety (Display Screen Equipment) Regulations 1992 (S.I. 1992/2792 )

These Regulations require employers to assess all computer workstations to ensure health and safety risks are identified and effectively minimised. The Regulations stipulate that employees who use DSE in their work must be able to periodically take adequate breaks or changes of activity from using display screen equipment (DSE). Employees are also entitled to request eye and eyesight tests. Employers must also provide health and safety training and information about working with DSE to employees. The Regulations also set out requirements for display screens, keyboards, work desks or work surfaces and chairs as well as environmental factors such as providing adequate arrangements for space and lighting, along with measures for controlling noise, reflections and glare, heat, humidity and radiation. In addition, the software and tasks carried out by an operator or user of a computer must be appropriate to both the task being undertaken and the knowledge of the operator or user.

Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1992 (S.I. 1992/2932 )

These Regulations, commonly known as PUWER, apply to the equipment provided for use in workplaces in general, including offshore installations. They also apply to self-employed people who use equipment in a work capacity. The Regulations impose a wide range of requirements for the provision and use of work equipment, including: suitability; maintenance; risks; information and instructions; training; EU conformity; dangerous parts of machinery; protection against specific hazards; working in high or very low temperatures; operating controls; isolation; stability; lighting; maintenance; markings; and warnings and exemptions.

Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992 (S.I. 1992/2966 )

The regulations stipulate that personal protective equipment (PPE) should be supplied and used in the workplace wherever there are risks to health and safety that cannot be eliminated or managed in any other way. The regulations also require that PPE is: properly assessed to ensure its suitability; issued with full instructions on its safe use; stored and maintained properly; and used correctly by employees.

The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1992 (S.I. 1992/2051 )

The regulations set out responsibilities for carrying out risk assessments and health surveillance in the workplace, as well as putting health and safety arrangements including assistance in place. Other responsibilities set out by the regulations include: procedures for serious and imminent danger and for danger areas; co-operation and co-ordination between employers sharing work premises; self-employed persons’ undertakings; working in hosted premises; providing information for employees; capabilities and training; employees’ duties; and responsibilities towards temporary workers.

1993

150th anniversary of the Mines Inspectorate

HM Inspectorate of Mines was formed in 1843 under the leadership of Hugh Seymour Tremenheere. The mining industry has undergone many changes in the intervening years, but its safety record has improved tremendously and today the UK continues to be the world leader in mining health and safety. For more information about the early history of HM Inspectorate of Mines please see the 1843 entry ‘Mines Inspectorate was formed’ in this Timeline. You can also find out about the Mines Inspectorate in the 21st century, in the HSE Website’s Health and safety in mining pages.

1994

Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994 (S.I. 1994/3140)

The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994 (CDM) came into force on 31 March 1995. The first part of the Regulations dealt with the application of the Regulations and definitions. The second part outlines how the regulations apply to construction work. The roles and responsibilities of clients and agents of clients are explained in the third part. There are also separate sections for developers, appointments of principal contractor and planning supervisor and the responsibilities assigned to these roles.

Major Review of Regulation completed

In 1992, the Health and Safety Commission was charged with undertaking a review of extant health and safety legislation. The purpose of the review was to check whether existing legislation was still relevant and necessary in its current form. In addition the review aimed to reduce the administrative burdens that legislation can place on small businesses and also examine HSE’s general approach to enforcement. The review found that, while there was widespread support for the framework of health and safety legislation, much of the current law was seen as ‘too voluminous, complicated and fragmented’. When the finding of the report was published in 1994, it recommended the removal of 100 sets of regulations and seven pieces of primary legislation as well as the simplification of many of the 340 requirements and recommendations for associated administrative paperwork. A comprehensive programme was put into place to achieve the necessary reforms and the ongoing process to reduce the burdens on business is described in HSE’s Simplification Plan.

1995

100th anniversary of the Quarry Inspectorate

Health and Safety Laboratory (HSL) becomes an agency of HSE

An experimental station to investigate explosions in coal mines was set up at Eskmeals in Cumberland in 1911 by the UK government. Over the next few years, this area of research continued to grow and after the formation of the Safety in Mines Research Board in 1921, a site at Harpur Hill was acquired in 1924 for large scale mining safety work. The Safety in Mines Research Establishment (SMRE) was formed in 1947 and this combined the work of the Buxton site with the central laboratories which had opened in Sheffield in 1928. In 1959 the Occupational Medicine Laboratory was opened in London in 1959 and in 1975 the three organisations were merged to form the Health and Safety Executive’s Research and Laboratory Services Division (RLSD) .RLSD’s laboratories were integrated into one laboratory, the Health and Safety Laboratory in 1995. More information is available on the HSL Website link to external website

1996

Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 (S.I. 1996/1592 )

The Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 came into force on 2nd September 1996. The Regulations set out a wide range of enforceable safety measures for the construction industry including the provision of “suitable and sufficient safe access to and egress from every place of work and to any other place provided for the use of any person while at work, which access and egress shall be without risks to health and properly maintained.” Specific requirements of the Regulations included: preventing falls; ensuring the stability of structures; safe methods for demolition and dismantling operations; protection from falling objects; temperature and weather protection; fire detection and fire-fighting measures; provision of welfare facilities; safe use of explosives; provision of lighting; safe systems for using cofferdams and caissons; inspection by competent persons; training; and others.

1997

Southall rail accident

The Southall rail accident occurred when the 10.35 high speed train from Swansea to London Paddington collided with a freight train operated by English Welsh and Scottish Railway. The incident happened at 13.15 on 19 September 1997 at Southall East Junction. Seven people died in the accident and 139 people were injured, some of these sustaining serious injuries. HSE’s Railway Inspectorate investigated the incident and an official inquiry was conducted by Professor John Uff.

1998

Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 (S.I. 1998/2451 )

The first of the general provisions of the Regulations covered qualification and supervision and states that ‘No person shall carry out work in relation to a gas fitting or gas storage vessel unless he is competent to do so’. The Regulations imposed a duty on employers to ensure that people carrying out work on gas installations have been approved by HSE under regulation 3(3) of these Regulations. Requirements for materials and workmanship, protection against damage, existing gas fittings as well as general safety precautions are also outlined in the Regulations.

1999

40th anniversary of the Nuclear Installation Inspectorate

The Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) came into being in 1959, under one of the provisions of the Nuclear Installations Act 1959. The Act came into force as a consequence of the Fleck Inquiry into the fire at Windscale Pile 1. This incident which occurred in 1957 has been the UK’s worst nuclear accident. Over the years, NII has been involved in responding to accidents such as Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, participating in major public inquiries and providing help to European regulators. Today’s Nuclear Directorate (ND) sets the safety and security standards to be used on nuclear sites in the UK. ND is also involved in a Transition Programme aimed at creating a new Nuclear Statutory Corporation (NSC) that will incorporate all elements of the HSE’s Nuclear Directorate (Nuclear Installations Directorate, Office for Civil Nuclear Security and UK Safeguards Office).

Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 1999 (S.I. 1999/743 )

The Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 1999 (COMAH) set out the responsibilities of operators of plants where scheduled hazardous chemicals are used, to prevent major accidents and limit the consequences of major accidents to people and the environment. The regulations require operators to formulate a major accident prevention policy and also to notify the competent authority at the start of the construction of a plant handling scheduled chemicals and at the end, when the plant is being decommissioned or the chemicals are no longer present on site. The regulations also require retailed safety reports to be sent to the competent authority and for operators to produce emergency plans in consultation with local authorities. In addition, operators must provide information to the public with regard to local safety measures and actions to take in the event of a major accident at a COMAH site.

Ladbroke Grove train crash (31 fatalities)

Thirty-one people died and over 400 were injured when a passenger train passed a red signal and collided with a high-speed passenger train at Ladbroke Grove in West London on 5 October 1999. The Health and Safety Executive’s Railway Inspectorate investigated the incident and Lord Cullen chaired a Public Inquiry into the causes of the crash as well as wider issues relating to regulatory matters and safety management. In 2004 HSE won a prosecution against Thames Trains for breaches of Section 2 and 3 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act relating to driver training. Following this, in 2005 the Crown Prosecution Service successfully prosecuted Network Rail Infrastructure (formerly Railtrack Plc) under Section 3 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act.

Bill Callaghan appointed as Chair of the Health and Safety Commission

Bill Callaghan took up the post of Chair of the Health and Safety Commission in October 1999. Formerly the Chief Economist and Head of the Economic and Social Affairs Department at the Trades Union Congress (TUC), Bill Callaghan also served on the Low Pay Commission from 1997 – 2000. During his time as HSC Chair, Bill Callaghan played a major role in the ‘Revitalising health and safety’ campaign which set targets and priorities for improving health and safety performance. He also lead on the development of HSC’s strategy to 2010 and beyond and spearheaded the sensible risk campaign which was aimed at overturning health and safety myths. Bill Callaghan was knighted in June 2007 in recognition of his outstanding contribution to health and safety management at work. He also received a Distinguished Service Award from the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (ROSPA) in October of that year.

2000

‘Revitalising health and safety strategy’ launched

The Revitalising Health and Safety Strategy Statement was published in June 2000 to mark the start of the ten year campaign of the same name. The Revitalising health and safety strategy was launched at a time when the same proportion of people had been injured at work since the early 1990s. The aim of the Revitalising health and safety strategy was to help people at work to protect themselves and their business, to improve the quality of life in the workplace and to help employers and employees to make work safer and healthier. Measurable targets were set and reviewed at regular intervals.

‘Securing health together occupational health strategy for Great Britain’ launched

The ‘Securing health together occupational health strategy for Great Britain’ was launched in 2000 as a ten year strategy for reducing high levels of occupational ill-health and the resulting costs to families, employers and society. The Strategy was based on several main targets: to reduce ill health in workers and the public that had been caused or affected by work; to help people who had been ill to return to work, whether or not their work had caused their absence; to improve work opportunities for people not in work, due to illness or disability; to use the work environment to help people improve or maintain their health. A number of measurable targets were at the heart of the Strategy and the contemporary estimated gross benefits of reaching the targets were estimated to be 6.6 to 21.8 billion pounds sterling by 2010.

2004

HSC’s ‘Strategy for workplace health and safety to 2010 and beyond’ launched

A Strategy was launched in February 2004 to set a new direction for the role of the Health and Safety Commission, Health and Safety Executive and Local Authorities. The Strategy aimed to improve poor safety performances, engender a greater participation of workers in workplace health and safety, build closer involvement between stakeholders and HSE and provide clearer and simple information and advice in a more accessible way. More information about the 2004 Strategy is available. You may also be interested in the later 2009 Strategy.

Morecambe Bay: death of cockle-pickers (21 fatalities)

An incident occurred on the night of 5-6 February 2004 when 35 cockle pickers, most of whom were Chinese, were cut off by the tide as they worked on the cockle banks on Morecambe Bay. It is thought that 23 of the workers died, although only 21 bodies were recovered. HSE inspectors joined with the police in a major investigation into the incident. The Crown Prosecution Service brought criminal charges of manslaughter and facilitation against a number of individuals. Following the incident, HSE produced some practical guidelines for safe working in tidal areas and estuaries. Some organisers of cockling work also introduced some improvements to their work processes including: providing protective clothing and high-visibility garments; using better vehicles; and carrying dinghies, lifejackets and life rafts.

HSE’s Infoline service received its 2 millionth call

The HSE Infoline public enquiry contact centre took its two millionth call in September 2004. Run by the National Britannia Group based in Caerphilly, Infoline was set up in July 1996 to provide health and safety information and access to expert sources of guidance and advice. While Infoline’s services are available to anyone with an interest in workplace health and safety matters, the majority of enquiries come from small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Enquirers can remain anonymous if they wish and all enquiries are treated confidentially. The most common queries relate to asbestos, the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR) and health and safety requirements for setting up a new business. [Update: In a move to improve efficiency further and deliver value for taxpayers, HSE’s Infoline ended on 30 September 2011. See more about HSE’s new arrangements for online reporting of injuries and incidents.]

HSC’s ‘Strategy for workplace health and safety to 2010 and beyond’ launched

Explosion at ICL Plastic factory, Maryhill, Glasgow

An explosion occurred at the ICL Plastics factory in Maryhill, Glasgow on 11 May 2004. Nine people were killed in the incident and many more suffered injuries. The explosion occurred when liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) leaked from an underground metal pipe in the basement of the factory. The LPG ignited and the resulting explosion caused the building to collapse. Lord Brian Gill was appointed to hold an Inquiry into the events that led up to the disaster. HSE inspectors and retired inspectors and the Chief Executive and the then Deputy Chief Executive gave evidence in the formal hearings. Lord Gill’s report link to external website

was published in July 2009 and outlined various recommendations for HSE as the body which (together with Local Authorities) regulates LPG hazards in industrial and commercial premises.

2005

Buncefield explosion

A series of explosions occurred at the Buncefield Oil Storage Depot at Hemel Hempstead in Hertfordshire on 11th December 2005. A large area of the site was engulfed by a fire which resulted from one of the initial massive explosions. Although more than 50 people were injured in the incident, no-one died. A large area around the Buncefield site was evacuated as a precaution. Many of the commercial and residential properties in the vicinity were damaged in the incident. The fire, which burned for several days, destroyed most of the site and released large plumes of black smoke into the atmosphere. The Health and Safety Executive and the Environment Agency launched a joint investigation into the incident. Five companies were prosecuted as a result of the incident. A series of recommendations from HSE was published under the title “Recommendations on land use planning and the control of societal risk around major hazard sites PDF

” and the investigation culminated in the publication of the Final report link to external website

in December 2008.

2006

Transfer of responsibility for railway safety from HSE to the Office of the Rail Regulator

HSE assumed responsibility for railway safety in 1990 when the Railway Inspectorate moved from the Department of Transport. The move took place following criticism of the Inspectorate for not protecting passengers adequately and for not using modern risk assessment techniques. During the period 1993 to 1996, British Rail was privatised and over a hundred companies took charge of the railways. This resulted in a major change to railway safety culture and risk management. HSE introduced a new regulatory framework to manage these changes and the key elements of the framework included new safety case and permissioning regimes. On 1 April 2006 railway safety passed to the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR). More information about HSE’s role in regulating the health and safety of the railway industry can be found in ‘A farewell to trains’ PDF

Workplace Health Connect launched

Workplace Health Connect was launched in February 2006 as a two year project pilot project to give advice on workplace health, safety and return to work issues. The advice given by the pilot was free, confidential and practical and was aimed at small and medium sized businesses (ie those with between 5 to 250 workers) in England and Wales. Workplace Connect was managed, funded and quality controlled by HSE but was independently run. It incorporated an Adviceline, a problem-solving visit service and a system of referrals to approved local specialists where appropriate. The pilot ended in February 2008.

Redgrave Court new headquarters officially opened

HSE’s new headquarters building, Redgrave Court, based in Bootle, Merseyside was officially opened by HRH the Duke of York on 19 July 2006. Redgrave Court has provided a central base for staff and contractors who previously occupied six separate buildings. It has enabled staff to undertake new and more efficient ways of working, allowed for better use of resources and provided increased access to senior managers. A map of all HSE offices is available on the HSE Website.

2007

Responsibility for the Adventure Activities Licensing Authority (AALA) passes to HSE.

The Adventure Activities Licensing Authority (AALA) was launched in 1996 and became HSE’s responsibility in 2007. The AALA controls the licensing regime for the provision of adventure activities for young people within the scope of the Adventure Activities Licensing Regulations 2004 (AALR). HSE’s Field Operations and Policy Group work with organisations in this sector to provide guidance, advice and support and to improve health and safety. More information about the work of the AALA is available via the AALA web pages.

Construction (Design and Management) Regulations (CDM 2007) (S.I. 2007/320 ) launched.

The CDM Regulations combine the CDM Regulations 2004 and the Construction (Health Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 into one regulatory package, aimed at alleviating the previous complex and at times, bureaucratic approach taken by many duty holders. The aim of the CDM Regulations is to reduce the risk of harm to workers who build, use, maintain and demolish structures. Effective planning and management of construction projects, from design concept onwards is at the heart of the Regulations. The aim is for health and safety considerations to be treated as a normal part of a project’s development, not an afterthought or bolt-on extra. Find out more about the CDM Regulations.

Bill Callaghan is knighted for his services to health and safety

Bill Callaghan became Chair of the Health and Safety Commission (HSC) on 1 October 1999. During his career with HSC and HSE, Bill Callaghan championed the sensible risk message, had a leading role in ensuring that risks to health and safety in the workplace are properly controlled and has played a key role in developing the HSC/E Strategy to 2010. In 2007 Bill Callaghan was knighted for his services to health and safety. He left HSE on 27 Sept 2007 and was replaced by Judith E. Hackitt CBE.

Judith Hackitt appointed as new Chair of the Health and Safety Commission, following on from the retirement of Sir Bill Callaghan

Judith Hackitt was appointed as Chair of the Health and Safety Commission (HSC) on 1 October 2007. Ms Hackitt’s five year appointment follows on from her previous role as a Commissioner of HSC during the period 2002 – 2005 and an assignment as Director of the European Chemical Industry Council‘s Chemistry for Europe project.

HSE takes on responsibility for the security activities of the Office for Nuclear Security (OCNS) and UK Safeguards Office (UKSO)

On 1 April 2007 the security activities of the Office for Civil Nuclear Security (OCNS) transferred to the Health and Safety Executive. This happened as a result of recommendations in the 2005 Hampton report. This means that HSE’s Nuclear Directorate became the single point of contact for operational matters relating to nuclear safety, security and safeguards. You can find out more about the work of OCNS from HSE’s Nuclear Directorate web pages. link to external website

The Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) European Union regulations come into force in the UK and across Europe

The Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of CHemicals (REACH) Regulations came into force on 1 June 2007, replacing several Regulations and European directives with a single system. One of the main requirements of REACH is for importers or manufacturers of substances to register them with the central European Chemicals Agency. The aim of this is to ensure that human health and the environment is protected by ensuring that manufacturers and importers understand and manage the risks associated with chemicals. REACH also allows substances to move freely on the EU market as well as allowing for free competition and innovation in the European chemicals industry.

Find out more about REACH

Responsibility for the Adventure Licensing Authority (AALA) passes to HSE.

2008

HSC/HSE merges to form one organisation

The Health and Safety Commission and Health and Safety Executive took the decision to merge their powers and functions to become a new unitary body with the name ‘Health and Safety Executive’. The merger took place following a 2006 consultation exercise setting out the benefits of the merger. For more information, read the HSC/E merger enforcement statement.

Health and Safety (Offences) Act 2008

The Health and Safety (Offences) Act 2008 PDF

came into force on 16 January 2009. Under the provisions of the Act, offenders who break the law will be subjected to higher fines and longer sentences. The Act makes imprisonment an option for more health and safety offences in both the lower and higher courts. It also allows certain offences which at one time could only be tried in lower courts, be tried in the higher courts. However the main change which the Act has brought is to raise the maximum fine which may be imposed in the lower courts to £20,000 for most health and safety offences.

Pesticides Safety Directorate transfers to HSE

The Pesticides Safety Directorate (PSD) transferred from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) to HSE on 1 April 2008 following recommendations of the 2005 Hampton Review of Regulators. The transfer allowed PSD and HSE to explore joint areas of interest for example on regulatory science and policy for chemicals, pesticides, detergents and biocides. PSD has retained a distinct identity in HSE and continues to have its policy set by Defra. More information is available on the PSD website. link to external website

2009

Gas Safe Register – 10 year contract to Capita

A new registration scheme for gas engineers was launched on 1 April 2009. The scheme is known as the Gas Safe Register and is administered under a 10 year contract by the Capita Group Plc. Under the Gas Safe Register, Capita have made a commitment to deliver improvements to gas safety by raising awareness of domestic gas risks among consumers and by increasing public confidence in registered gas engineers and the safety of public gas work. Gas engineers will also benefit from the Gas Safe Register as they will have more flexible payment and registration options. The administrative burdens on them will also be reduced. Find out more about the Gas Safe Register.

Health and safety law poster replaced – after 10 years service!

A new version of the health and safety law poster was published on 6 April 2009. The poster includes a list of basic points relating to health and safety in the workplace and it outlines what employers and workers must do to comply with the law. The health and safety poster must be displayed in all workplaces or if this is not possible, each employee must be given a copy of the leaflet version. Information about how to obtain the poster or leaflets is available on the HSE Website.

HSE launches strategy for the health and safety of GB

HSE’s new Strategy was launched in 2009 following the aim of the new 2008 Board to develop a ‘renewed momentum to improve health and safety performance.’ One of the key drivers for this is the fact that the combined rate of illness and injury in Great Britain is the same as it was in 2004. The Board wanted to build on existing strengths, develop new ways of engaging with the workforce and meet continuing challenges for health and safety. The Strategy explains that everyone has a role to play in improving health and safety in the workplace but there must be strong leadership and commitment to drive this forward. Training is described as a key component of the improvement process. The Strategy also reinforces HSE’s role in inspection and enforcement along with monitoring hazardous industries to guard against possible catastrophes.

2010

Health and Safety Pledge Forum launched

The Health and Safety Pledge Forum was launched on 24 February 2010 as part of HSE’s 2009 Strategy The Health and Safety of Great Britain\\ Be part of the solution. The Strategy encouraged organisations to show their commitment to workplace health and safety by signing the HSE Safety Pledge. HSE is keen for those who have signed the Pledge to share ideas for improving health and safety with each other or to work with HSE on collaborative ventures in risk management. The Pledge Forum helps this process by allowing pledge signers to share ideas and best practice and ask questions. It also contains a wealth of information on a range of topics including: worker protection; absence management; saving recruitment and insurance costs; improving productivity; reputation management; and case studies for both small/medium sized businesses and large businesses.

HSE introduces new Safety Alerts

In 2010 HSE revised its Safety Bulletin system to improve the way it warns industry about problems with substances, equipment, procedures and processes that may cause injury. The information contained in the bulletins are gathered from a range of sources including inspections, research, investigations, advice from industry and the EU Commission. There are three types of bulletin: Alerts which are immediate and vital; Notice which do not require immediate action but must be dealt with within a given timescale; and Other information which needs to be shared with a wide audience or specific group or sector of industry. Safety Bulletins can be received via email, text message or RSS feed and are also available on the HSE Website. To check the Safety Bulletin titles that are available to you and sign up for those of interest, please visit the Health and Safety Bulletins sign up page.

The Control of Artificial Optical Radiation at Work Regulations 2010 (S.I. 2010/1140)

The Control of Artificial Optical Radiation at Work Regulations 2010 aim to protect workers from health risks associated with exposure to hazardous sources of artificial optical radiation (AOR). The Regulations require employers who may expose workers to AOR to assess the risk of adverse health effects of AOR to the skin or eyes. This assessment should include measurements or calculations for the levels of radiation to which employees are exposed. It must also assess the level, wavelength and duration of exposure. Employers are require to reduce or eliminate exposure to AOR where practicable, provide appropriate information and training for employees and ensure that exposed employees have their health monitored and receive medical examinations. HSE has produced ‘Guidance for Employers on the Control of Artificial Optical Radiation at Work Regulations (AOR) 2010’ PDF

for those employers who would like to find out more about their responsibilities under the Regulations.

Lord Young’s review of health and safety, ‘Common Sense – Common Safety’ is published

Lord Young’s report was published on 15 October 2010 and sets out a series of recommendations for improving the way health and safety is applied in Great Britain and for reviewing today’s ‘compensation culture’. The review, commissioned by the Prime Minister, David Cameron, has a wider remit than HSE’s sphere of responsibility, however HSE has welcomed Lord Young’s review and has continued to offer information and participate in improvements where appropriate. To this end, HSE has co-operated with a number of organisations to develop the Occupational Safety Consultants Register (OSCR). This will go live in January 2011. HSE has also produced a series of risk assessment tools for offices, shops, classrooms and charity shops.

2011

Occupational Safety Consultants Register (OSHCR)

The Occupational Safety Consultants Register (OSHCR link to external website

) provides a source for identifying consultants who are qualified to provide general advice on health and safety to help UK businesses manage workplace risks. While many companies will feel confident about carrying out their own workplace risk assessments and implementing appropriate health and safety measures, those who need additional help can turn to OSHCR. The consultants listed in OSHCR are recognised by the key occupational health and safety organisations who participate in the OSHCR scheme. OSHCR can be used to search for consultants by keyword, industry, topic, county or by provision of free information.

The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) launched 1 April

On 1 April 2011, the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) link to external website

was established as an agency of the Health and Safety Executive. ONR’s objective is to consolidate the functions of HSE’s Nuclear Directorate including the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate, the Office for Civil Nuclear Security and the UK Safeguards Office, as well as the Department for Transport’s Radioactive Materials Transport Division. ONR is responsible for protecting people from the hazards inherent in the nuclear industry. It does this through enforcing relevant legislation and by encouraging the nuclear industry to aspire to an exemplary health and safety culture. ONR uses specialist advice from HSE and consultants and runs a nuclear safety studies programme to help it with inspection and assessment work. It also provides specialist assistance to various international energy organisations as well as nuclear regulators in a range of countries.

HSL celebrates 100 years

The Health and Safety Laboratory (HSL) celebrated its centenary this year. HSL is a leading scientific health and safety research organisation specialising in work-related activities. It is based in Buxton and its origins can be traced back to a 1911 Government-funded initiative aimed at investigating explosions in coal mines. The Safety in Mines Research Board was formed 10 years later and its work was conducted in both Buxton and Sheffield. Over the next few years the Buxton site became the Explosion and Flame Laboratory while the Sheffield site focussed on safety engineering. The Occupational Medicine and Hygiene Laboratory in Cricklewood, North London joined the existing research teams in 1966. In 1995 the three laboratories were combined together to form HSL, as an agency of HSE. HSL moved to Buxton in 2004.

Find out more about HSL

Lőfstedt report published

Professor Ragnar Lőfstedt’s report: ‘Reclaiming health and safety for all: an independent review of health and safety legislation’ was published in November 2011. The report was commissioned by Employment Minister Chris Grayling as part of the Government’s plan to overhaul the health and safety system in Britain. The report considers ways in which health and safety legislation can be combined, simplified or reduced so that the burden on British businesses can be alleviated. At the same time, it suggests how progress in improving health and safety in the workplace can continue. The report takes into account the views of employers’ and employees’ organisations, Government bodies, academics and professional health and safety organisations.

Find out more about the Lőfstedt report.

2012

The Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 (S.I. 2012/632 ) launched

The Regulations came into force in April 2012 and updated earlier asbestos regulations to take account of the fact that in the European Commission’s view, the UK had not completely implemented the EU Directive on exposure to asbestos as set out in EU Directive 2009/148/EC). The changes brought about by the new Regulations are fairly small and mostly affect some types of non-licensed work with asbestos including medical surveillance, record keeping and notification of work.

Fee for Intervention (FFI) launched 1 October

HSE’s new cost recovery scheme known as Fee for Intervention (FFI) came into force on 1 October 2012. FFI is administered under the Health and Safety (Fees) Regulations 2012 link to external website

and is used to recover HSE’s costs against those who contravene health and safety laws. The costs that are recouped in this way are those for inspection, investigation and taking enforcement action. FFI is designed to ensure that companies who break health and safety laws quickly put matters right. It will also discourage companies who try to undercut their competitors by flouting health and safety laws and putting people at risk. More information about FFI is available on the Fee for Intervention (FFI) web pages.

2013

The Health and Safety (Sharp Instruments in Healthcare) Regulations (S.I. 2013/645 )

The Health and Safety (Sharp Instruments in Healthcare) Regulations 2013 (S.I. 2013/645 link to external website

) which came into effect on 11 May 2013, require employers to ensure that the risks from needles and other ‘sharps’ used in healthcare are effectively controlled. The regulations stipulate that healthcare employers and contractors must provide suitable arrangements for the safe use and disposal of sharps and must train workers to understand the risks. In addition, the Regulations require employers and contactors to investigate any work-related incidents involving sharps, and to take appropriate action.

Health and Safety (Miscellaneous Repeals, Revocations and Amendments) Regulations 2013 (S.I. 2013/448 )

The Health and Safety (Miscellaneous Repeals, Revocations and Amendments) Regulations 2013 (S.I. 2013/448 link to external website ) came into force on 6 April 2013. These Regulations are designed to revoke a series of redundant and / or out of date legislation, including one Act and twelve statutory instruments. HSE has introduced these Regulations as part of a process of ensuring that employers can quickly understand their duty to provide a safe and healthy working environment for employees.

CDM 2015

Posted on April 29, 2015 by Nick Anderson

On 6 April 2015, CDM 2007 was revoked and replaced by the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 (CDM 2015).

The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations (CDM) are the main set of regulations for managing the health, safety and welfare of construction projects.

CDM 2015 is subject to certain transitional arrangements, for construction projects that began before 6 April 2015 and continue beyond that date. It applies to all building and construction work and includes new build, demolition, refurbishment, extensions, conversions, repair and maintenance.

Key changes of the new CDM Regulations 2015

1. All projects must have:

workers with the right skills, knowledge, training and experience
contractors providing appropriate supervision, instruction and information
a written construction phase plan

2. Project where more than one contractor is involved (domestic or non-domestic) must have 1 above plus:

principal designer and principal contractor must be appointed
a health and safety file

3. If work is scheduled to:

last longer than 30 working days and
have more than 20 workers working simultaneously at any point in the project
OR exceeds 500 person days

All of 1 and 2 above plus

Client must notify project to HSE

The CITB have created a short video which explains the basics of the new Regulations. You can watch it here.

Flying the flag for the 40 year old Health and Safety at Work Act

Posted on June 29, 2014 by Nick Anderson

The 40 year old Health and Safety at Work Act’s rules are founded on common sense, but they’ve been hijacked by jobsworths

Summer is well under way, so we can expect the usual litany of patronising health and safety announcements on public transport and elsewhere. Among the blindingly obvious bits of advice that have apparently passed mankind by in the millennia since we started to walk upright are the following: we should wear loose-fitting clothes in the heat, make sure we drink plenty of water and sit down if we feel faint.

At Lord’s of all places, the players during the England v Sri Lanka Test stopped not for drinks, which have sustained cricketers since the first ball was bowled at the ground 200 years ago, but for a sponsored “hydration break”; and the crowds baking in the June sun were encouraged to take in plenty of liquid. They certainly did that, though not much of it was water.

The World Cup has brought a crop of health and safety stories, usually centred on whether or not the Cross of St George can be flown and in what circumstances. Gordon McGiffen, a south London bricklayer who displayed England flags on a brand new block of flats which is covered in scaffolding, was told to take them down because they posed a health and safety risk. “All I am trying to do is support England and I have been told I am not allowed to,” Mr McGiffen said.

His is a familiar lament. Health and safety has become synonymous with nanny statism, interfering jobsworths, ludicrous litigation and risk aversion. And yet the Health and Safety at Work Act, which is 40 years old this summer, has arguably saved more lives than any other piece of legislation, including the ban on drink driving or the compulsory wearing of seat belts in cars. It may well have reduced deaths by 5,000 or more.

So how did an Act that was by any measure a milestone in social reform turn into one of the most disparaged statutes of recent times? Partly it has to do with the way the law is interpreted – and often wrongly blamed for absurd restrictions imposed on perfectly innocuous practices. But it also reflects an absolutist view that it is possible to avoid accidental injury or death, rather than simply to reduce the circumstances in which they might occur.

However, the restrictions that are now imposed in the name of health and safety were far from the minds of parliamentarians in June 1974, as they put the finishing touches to the new law. MPs and peers were aware that this was not only pioneering legislation but potentially of great significance. The Act’s purpose was to implement the recommendations of the Robens Committee, which reported in 1972 and concluded that the existing workplace safety legislation was over-elaborate and confusing, with about 30 Acts and 500 sets of regulations.

Robens recommended a new structure underpinned by an enabling Act setting out the basic principles of safety responsibility, thereby providing a statutory base on which all future regulations could be founded. New rules would, if possible, be confined to general statements of the objectives to be achieved. Robens wanted greater reliance on standards and codes and for no regulation to be made at all if a non-statutory alternative was available. While many might question whether the ambition of fewer rules was realised, the legislation certainly did what it said on the tin.

Before the Act, 700 employees were dying every year on average and hundreds of thousands were being injured. Last year, the number of fatalities at work was down to 148 and non-fatal injuries have dropped by more than 75 per cent. Even for those of us who balk at excessive regulation, that is a considerable achievement, not least when you think that 500 workers have died on construction sites in Qatar since 2012, building the infrastructure for the World Cup in 2022. That certainly puts a ban on flags into perspective.

Throughout our history, health and safety laws have often been a reaction to appalling tragedies. In his ill-starred response to the pit disaster in Soma last month, in which 300 miners died, the Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan cited examples from Britain’s industrial past to justify his own government’s inadequacies.

“I went back in British history,” he said. “Some 204 people died there after a mine collapsed in 1838. In 1866, 361 miners died in Britain. In an explosion in 1894, 290 people died there.” Indeed they did – but what is important is to learn the lessons. For instance, in 1862, when the beam of a pumping engine at Hartley Colliery in Northumberland broke and blocked the only mineshaft and means of ventilation, suffocating 204 miners, new legislation required that every seam should have at least two shafts or outlets.

Even as the more recent Health and Safety at Work Act was going through Parliament, an explosion at a chemical plant at Flixborough near Scunthorpe killed 28 people. Subsequent regulations imposed new rules on manufacturers who use dangerous substances. Why the Act was important is that is set out to prevent the accidents happening in the first place, rather than reacting to the death and injuries they cause, by which time it’s too late.

Forty years on, the Act has achieved what it set out to do, which is to insist upon high standards of health and safety in places of work. All we need do now is to apply the law with the common sense that inspired it in the first place.

Article shared from The Telegraph.

Health and Safety ‘red tape’ cut will threaten workers’ lives

Posted on May 12, 2014 by Nick Anderson

The government’s fervent desire to cut back on “key” health and safety legislation will increase accidents and fatalities in the workplace, says TUC.

For Workers’ Memorial Day, April 28th, the TUC alerted the public that workplace deaths are infrequently genuine accidents, and are more likely the result of serious employer negligence.

The union organisation’s commemorative report, Toxic, Corrosive and Hazardous: the government’s record on health and safety, warns that the coalition government has “drastically cut” health and safety inspections.

Despite this, it is estimated that around 20,000 people die each year as a direct result of injuries or health problems sustained whilst at work.

Health and Safety Executive (HSE) inspections, the report says, have experienced a 40 per cent cut to funding, compounded by a block on further regulation.

Shockingly, the report claims local authorities have dropped inspections by 93 per cent over the last four years. Further government proposals include H&S exemption for self-employed workers, a particularly vulnerable group for workplace accidents.

TUC General Secretary Frances O’Grady said: “The government says that the UK is a safe place to work and that we don’t need any more regulation. If only this were the case. With the UK ranked just 20th in the health and safety risk index of 34 developed nations, we’ve hardly got a record to be proud of”.

The TUC recommend the government reconsider and completely reverse their position on the importance of health and safety, instead ensuring that all workplaces are inspected regularly and providing further resources for the often overlooked area of occupational health.

Regulation must be upheld for workers who inhabit particularly dusty or otherwise carcinogenic environments, the report states, as well as ensuring that a maximum acceptable workplace temperature is enforced.

O’Grady added: “There is a real danger that further cuts and deregulation will destroy the workplace safety culture that has existed in Britain for many decades – with a disastrous effect on workers health and safety.

“But there is an alternative – a government that is committed to protecting workers and puts a stop to the large-scale negligence that claims the lives or health of far too many workers and costs the state billions of pounds”.

Article shared from www.theinformationdaily.com

Health and Safety Deserve Greater Respect

Posted on April 27, 2014 by Nick Anderson

With the funeral taking place last week of Keane  Wallis-Bennett, the pupil who died after a wall collapsed on her at Liberton High School, it was deeply insensitive timing by the Westminster Department for Works and Pensions to issue a news release downplaying and indeed ignoring the very serious hazards that occur in the educational sector.

The press release instead focused on “silly” health and safety cases in several sectors, including schools, and attempted to highlight the value of “common sense” in dealing with the subject. To prevent collapsing walls in schools or other buildings requires more than common sense. It requires proper inspections and enforcement of regulations, and application of good practice.

Of course life is a risky business, but good government should be about removing or reducing serious and preventable workplace threats to life and limb.

Also, within education, there are very serious workplace hazards that create other real and avoidable risks and sometimes very serious injuries and diseases – the occupational stress burden in the sector, the exposure of pupils and staff to asbestos in schools and a host of other health and safety threats that are not trivial.

Students, teachers, care-takers, cooks, cleaners and maintenance workers in the education sector all have a right to expect that their health and safety is taken seriously.

Your leader rightly refers to reductions on injury in the workplace due to effective workplace regulations and enforcement. However, the scale of both workplace injuries, which you mention , and occupational diseases, which you do not, remains very high in Scotland at a time when the UK government continues to mount ideological attacks on health and safety red tape.

Around two million working days have been lost each year in Scotland due to workplace injury and ill health. This amounts to almost a quarter of all sickness absence and is usually preventable. In recent years, only about 1 per cent of roughly 2,500 fatal and major workplace injuries in Scotland each year have resulted in a prosecution and conviction initiated by the Health and Safety Executive.

These are strong arguments against the savage coalition budget cuts of the HSE and local authority staff who enforce health and safety law, yet the DWP minister is curiously silent on such matters.

It will be interesting to see if the DWP now produces a press release for 28 April – International Workers Memorial Day – and, instead of trying to trivialise occupational health and safety yet again, announces proper measures to address our workplace disease and injury epidemics.

Article written by Professor Andrew Watterson, published in the The Scotsman – http://www.scotsman.com

Employment Law and the EU

Posted on March 8, 2014 by Nick Anderson

Employment Law and the EU Influence.

Employment law in the UK has undergone major changes in recent times, particularly in the last 20 years or so, with the EU exercising a significant influence on many areas of UK law.

History and Background

The European Commission takes responsibility for the co-ordination of national policies on labour, market, and workplace regulation. The treaties of the EU establish these areas of competence.

The Treaty of Rome, signed in 1957 by the six founding states (France, West Germany, Italy, Benelux), stated in Article 140 that one of the objects of the Community was to harmonise laws relating to employment and labour law. This covered areas such as working conditions, health and safety, trade union law, and social security.

Ten years after an unsuccessful bid to join the European Community, the UK acceded to the Treaty of Rome in 1973. The European Communities Act 1972 provided that all obligations arising out of any treaty shall have legal effect in the UK without further enactment. Treaty articles are directly applicable and will override national law.

In addition to treaties, the EU may issue directives. These are binding as to the result to be achieved, but the member state must implement them in their own laws within a prescribed time limit set by the EU.

The Courts of Justice of the European Communities (ECJ) is based in Luxembourg, and is made up from one judge from each EU country, assisted by eight advocates-general. Their independence is guaranteed, despite being appointed by each of the member states governments. The ECJ’s role is to ensure that treaties are correctly interpreted and applied, and that EU law is complied with.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights was approved by the EU member states at the Nice Summit in December 2000. It set out a whole range of civil, political, and social rights to be enjoyed by EU citizens. It was a political declaration, without legal force, but it became legally binding in the Lisbon Reform Treaty on 3 November 2009. The Lisbon Treaty amends the Treaty on the European Union (Maastricht) and the Treaty Establishing the European Community (Rome).

Examples of EU Law

Perhaps the most well known EU directive to be enacted into UK employment law is the Working Time Directive (93/104/EC of 23 November 1993). The original directive was amended by Directive 2000/34/EC of 22 June 2000.

The Working Time Directive is a collection of regulations concerning hours of work, designed to protect the health and safety of workers. Key features are the limiting of the working week to 48 hours in 7 days, and a minimum rest period of 11 hours in each 24 hours. The provisions of this directive, and the Young Workers Directive (94/33/EC), were enacted into UK law by way of the Working Time Regulations in October 1998.

Whilst some EU countries have sought to reduce working hours well below the 48 hour limit, under the Working Time Regulations it is possible to opt out or to average out the hours worked over a period of 17 weeks or more.

Employees’ rights to information about the business they work for were provided under the Transnational Information and Consultation of Employees Regulations 1999. This implemented the European Works Council Directive (94/95/EC). The regulations require a European Works Council (or EWC) to be established in companies with at least 1000 employees and at least 150 employees in each of two EU member states. Employee representatives are expected to receive information relevant to the terms and conditions of employment, and information about activities which may significantly affect the interest of those they represent. There must also be a written agreement on the arrangements for the information and consultation of employees.

The 1999 Regulations have been further enhanced several times under the Information and Consultation Directive 2002 (2002/14/EC), and presently, the Consultation of Employees Regulations 2004 applies to employers with at least 50 employees.

The Temporary and Agency Workers Directive (2008/104/EC) seeks to guarantee people who get jobs through employment agencies the same pay and conditions as permanent employees carrying out the same work in the business that they are employed. Proposed by the European Commission in 2002, it was met with stubborn opposition from a minority of member states, the UK included. In the end the UK agreed to implement the Directive by December 2011.

The purpose of the Temporary Agency Workers Directive, as with all EU Directives, is to harmonise the law across Europe. As well as giving temporary workers more rights after a 12 week qualifying period, it also serves to prevent unfair competition between member states. It is also intended to prevent ‘social dumping’ – when employers move operations to other countries to take advantage of cheaper labour costs. The social function is to ensure a higher standard of living and quality of life, consistent with the aims of the European Union Treaty. On implementation, the UK’s 1.3m agency workers gained the same pay and conditions as permanent workers after being employed for 12 weeks.

Is the EU influence on UK law without limits?

There are times when the UK may be viewed within Europe as a rebel state, taking a “pick and choose” approach to EU law. Austria, Finland, Norway, Portugal, Belgium, Sweden and Spain all have working time limits of 39 or 40 hours a week, as a result of the Working Time Directive. A bold experiment by the French government in 2000 to introduce a 35 hour week resulted in industry and workplace agreements covering millions of workers, reducing working time and introducing more flexible ways of working. Yet, despite a vote by the European Parliament to end the UK opt out, the UK government are still determined to keep it. It is likely that the debate will continue.

In a report published in 2007*, the House of Lords European Union Committee stated that the relatively light regulation of the UK labour market, in comparison with some other EU Member States, has been advantageous in allowing a flexibility of employment arrangements which has benefited the UK economy. It did, however, conclude that problems of social disadvantage and structural unemployment, where these exist in the UK, would be better addressed by measures aimed at tackling poor skills and social inequality than by changing labour law.

Also, many member states of the EU see the Charter of Fundamental Rights as a useful addition to the European Convention on Human Rights. The UK government, however, has secured a written guarantee in the Lisbon Reform Treaty that the Charter cannot be used by the European Courts of Justice to alter British labour law, or other laws that deal with social rights. The negotiated protocol which is annexed to the Lisbon Treaty states the following –

The charter does not extend the ability of the European Court of Justice, or any court or tribunal of the United Kingdom, to find that the laws, regulations or administrative provisions, practices or action of the United Kingdom are inconsistent with fundamental rights, freedoms and principles that it reaffirms.
In particular, and for the avoidance of doubt, nothing in Title IV of the charter creates justiciable rights applicable to the United Kingdom, except in so far as the United Kingdom has provided for such rights in its national law.

Predictably, there were mixed reactions to this agreement. Speaking in June 2007, the UK prime minister of the time, Tony Blair, said that the outcome of the talks made it “absolutely clear that the Charter of Fundamental Rights is not going to be justiciable in British courts or alter British Law”

The Deputy Director-General of the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), John Cridland, stated: “We welcome the government’s success in securing what appear clear opt-outs from the Charter of Fundamental Rights in areas that could have damaged the UK’s flexible labour market”

The General Secretary of the Trades Union Congress (TUC), Brendan Barber, said: “It is extremely disappointing to see that the UK workers and citizens are to enjoy fewer rights than those in the rest of Europe… Are we to think that the UK economy can only prosper by treating UK employees worse than others in Europe?”

Sir Menzies Campbell, the Leader of the Liberal Democrats at the time, similarly warned: “By opting out of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, there is now the danger of a two tier citizenship in the EU”

Perhaps until full public support is gained by way of a referendum on future treaties, the UK will not enjoy the same freedom and equality as the majority of Europe already does.

(*)Modernising European Union Labour Law, has the UK anything to gain, House of Lords European Union Committee, report published 27 June 2007. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldselect/ldeucom/120/120.pdf