Health and safety at work statistics published for 2016

HSE’s latest annual statistics have been published and show that while Britain continues to be one of the safest places to work in Europe, many workers are still being injured or made ill by work.

The statistics show that an estimated 30.4 million working days were lost due to work related ill health or injury in 2015/16 and the estimated costs to Britain of injuries and ill health due to current working conditions is £14.1 billion (2014/15 figures based on 2014 prices). For more information visit HSE’s Statistics Website.

Once again the European Week for Safety and Health at Work proved a big success. The week of 24 – 28 October saw activities take place all over Europe aimed at promoting healthy ageing and sustainable work for all ages.

Things kicked off on 24 October with, among others, a conference in Bratislava organised by the Slovak EU Council Presidency. The conference, entitled ‘A better preventive culture in a new labour market’, was attended by EU-OSHA director Dr Christa Sedlatschek who presented the campaign’s latest findings. The conference provided an excellent opportunity to discuss major challenges for OSH in the future, such as the demographic change. Among many others, labour inspectors from Cyprus, Poland and Slovakia showed their active involvement in the campaign and the European Week.

In Spain events took place in over 40 cities. Providing real solutions to businesses, workers and key stakeholders on how to achieve a healthy, sustainable working life was the main focus.

In Madrid a video screening, workshop and technical days took place – all focusing on the importance of sustainable work at all ages. And in Barcelona a seminar looked at the various advantages and inconveniences to having different age groups in the workplace.

On 28 October another focal point, the Swedish Work Environment Authority, held its annual Swedish OSH parliament event in Stockholm. Dr Sedlatschek was in attendance as Professor of Occupational and Environmental Medicine at Uppsala University, Eva Vingård, presented new research on “Healthy workplaces for women and men of all ages”.

The European Week was also promoted by The Institute for the Advancement of Safety at Work in Croatia who hosted the Good Morning Croatia television show to discuss the Healthy Workplaces for All Ages E-guide and how to adopt a holistic approach to health and safety at work.

As well as on television, there was online promotion by EU-OSHA’s media partners. PPE.ORG got things underway with a Twitter chat ahead of the European Week on 19 October. This was followed on 26 October by an exclusive ‘virtual Q&A session’ between media partners and EU-OSHA director Dr Sedlatschek who reminded us that, ‘healthy working lives are good for individuals’ wellbeing and the economy. Healthy workplaces are not a luxury; they are essential.’

Media partners also organised events to showcase the campaign. In Poland Promotor BHP hosted the ‘Human Factor in Safety’ conference to share tools and experiences for creating safe working conditions in the mining, fuel and energy and metallurgical industries. In Germany, the ISSA Mining Newsletter organised the first Vision Zero Europe Conference focusing on the prevention of accidents and illnesses at work.

Seguranca Comportamental in Portugal also organised several events and seminars including a course on preventive health and safety for young technicians and another looking at age as a factor in accidents at work. A number of other media partners, including Safety Management, Seguridad Laboral, Prevention World, Rhsaludable, Gesunde Arbeit and PrevenBlog also got involved in promoting European Week events.

EU-OSHA’s Official Campaign Partners were also busy hosting a number of activities and events. For example, In EU-OSHA’s home city of Bilbao, PESI, the Spanish Technology Platform for Industrial Safety, along with its European counterpart ETPIS (the Cross-ETP Initiative on Industrial Safety), held the European Forum S2R, ‘Future Safety & Security Research in Europe 2016’.

All these events were the perfect opportunity to bring together EU-OSHA’s network of partners, workers and employers together to exchange best practices and generate ideas on how make workplaces more sustainable. If you were at one of the many events, don’t forget to share your stories and post your pictures on our Facebook event page.

To find out more about safety and health at work visit the Healthy Workplaces for All Ages campaign website, and don’t forget to follow the campaign on Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter, using the hashtag #EUhealthyworkplaces to keep up to date with the latest news and events. You can subscribe to our newsletter via the campaign website www.healthy-workplaces.eu

Who enforces health and safety law?

Health and safety law is enforced by inspectors from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) or by inspectors from your local authority.

Inspectors have the right to enter any workplace without giving notice, though notice may be given where the inspector thinks it is appropriate. On a normal inspection visit an inspector would expect to look at the workplace, the work activities, your management of health and safety, and to check that you are complying with health and safety law. The inspector may offer guidance or advice to help you. They may also talk to employees and their representatives, take photographs and samples, serve improvement notices and take action if there is a risk to health and safety which needs to be dealt with immediately.

Enforcing health and safety law

On finding a breach of health and safety law, the inspector will decide what action to take. The action will depend on the nature of the breach, and will be based on the principles set out in HSE’s Enforcement Policy Statement. The inspector should provide employees or their representatives with information about any action taken, or which is necessary for the purpose of keeping them informed about matters affecting their health, safety and welfare.

Inspectors may take enforcement action in several ways to deal with a breach of the law. In most cases these are:

Informal

Where the breach of the law is relatively minor, the inspector may tell the dutyholder, for example the employer or contractor, what to do to comply with the law, and explain why. The inspector will, if asked, write to confirm any advice, and to distinguish legal requirements from recommendations.

Improvement notice

Where the breach of the law is more serious, the inspector may issue an improvement notice to tell the dutyholder to do something to comply with the law. The inspector will discuss the improvement notice and, if possible, resolve points of difference before serving it. The notice will say what needs to be done, why, and by when. The time period within which to take the remedial action will be at least 21 days, to allow the dutyholder time to appeal to an Industrial Tribunal if they so wish (see ‘Appeals’ below). The inspector can take further legal action if the notice is not complied with within the specified time period.

Prohibition notice

Where an activity involves, or will involve, a risk of serious personal injury, the inspector may serve a prohibition notice prohibiting the activity immediately or after a specified time period, and not allowing it to be resumed until remedial action has been taken. The notice will explain why the action is necessary. The dutyholder will be told in writing about the right of appeal to an Industrial Tribunal (see ‘Appeals’ below).

Prosecution

In some cases the inspector may consider that it is also necessary to initiate a prosecution. Decisions on whether to prosecute are informed by the principles in HSE’s Enforcement Policy Statement. Health and safety law gives the courts considerable scope for punishing offenders and deterring others. For example, a failure to comply with an improvement or prohibition notice, or a court remedy order, carries a fine of up to £20 000, or six months’ imprisonment, or both. Unlimited fines and in some cases imprisonment may be imposed by higher courts.

Fee for Intervention/Cost recovery

A Fee for Intervention (FFI) cost recovery scheme came into effect on 1 October 2012 and applies where HSE is the enforcing authority.

The Health and Safety (Fees) Regulations 2012 put a duty on HSE to recover its costs from dutyholders who are found to be in material breach of health and safety law. A material breach is where you have broken a health and safety law and the inspector judges this is serious enough for them to notify you in writing. This will either be a notification of contravention, an improvement or prohibition notice, or a prosecution.

Dutyholders have to pay a fee if an inspector identifies one or more material breaches of the law during a visit to their workplace. The fee is based on the amount of time that the inspector has had to spend identifying the breach, helping you to put it right, investigating and taking enforcement action.

Dutyholders who comply with the law, or where a breach is not material, will not pay a fee for any work that HSE does with them.

Further information on FFI, the hourly rate and what it could mean for you is available on the HSE website at www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/hse47.pdf.

Appeals

A dutyholder will be told in writing about the right of appeal to an Industrial Tribunal when an improvement or prohibition notice is served. The appeal mechanism is also explained on the reverse of the notice. The dutyholder will be told: n how to appeal, and given a form with which to appeal; n where and within what period an appeal may be brought; and n that the remedial action required by an improvement notice is suspended while an appeal is pending.

Information to employees or their representatives

During a normal inspection visit an inspector will expect to check that those in charge, eg employers, have arrangements in place for consulting and informing employees or their representatives, eg safety representatives, about health and safety matters. Such arrangements are required by law.

An inspector will meet or speak to employees or their representatives during a visit, wherever possible, unless this is clearly inappropriate because of the purpose of the visit. When they meet, employees or their representatives should always be given the opportunity to speak privately to the inspector, if they so wish.

The inspector will provide employees or their representatives with certain information where necessary for the purpose of keeping them informed about matters affecting their health, safety and welfare. This information relates to the workplace or activity taking place there, and action which the inspector has taken or proposes to take. The type of information that an inspector will provide includes: n matters which an inspector considers to be of serious concern; n details of any enforcement action taken by the inspector; and n an intention to prosecute the business (but not before the dutyholder is informed).

Depending on the circumstances, the inspector may provide this information orally or in writing.

 

Added: 01.11.2016

Bolton night club owner fined over asbestos exposure

A Bolton night club owner has been sentenced after admitting a failure to carry out a survey for asbestos before starting on the refurbishment of a local night club.

Added: 04.11.2016

Worker dies when temporary platform collapses

A worker died and two others were badly injured at a construction site in Putney, when a temporary platform collapsed.

Plastics processing company fined for safety failings

A Liverpool plastic processing and reprocessing company has been fined after a worker suffered serious injuries when his arm was caught in a machine.

Worker seriously injured in mobile platform fall

A Buckinghamshire waste equipment maintenance firm has been fined after a worker suffered serious head injuries when a mobile elevating work platform (MEWP) overturned.

Farming and drilling contractors fined after mast strikes power line

Two Norfolk-based companies have been fined after a worker suffered life-changing injuries following an overhead power line strike.

Recycling firm fined after worker injured in shredder

A Kent based recycling company has been fined after a worker was injured whilst repairing a shredder.

Environmental Services firm fined over electrocution of worker

A company providing environmental services has been prosecuted after a worker was killed during asbestos removal work at a Welsh High school.

Testing Services firm fined over worker’s CO death

A Nottingham based company has been fined after a worker died from carbon monoxide poisoning while using an accommodation unit.

Council and contractors fined after man dies and another seriously injured in road works

Liverpool City Council and two of its contractors have been prosecuted following two separate incidents involving road works on a busy city centre road.

London garage owner sentenced for health and safety failings

A garage owner in Seven Sisters, North London, has been fined for several health and safety breaches after a worker was attacked by a guard dog.

Research has shown that just cutting two valley roof tiles in-situ in each daily shift (about fifteen minutes of work in eight hours) resulted in the operator being exposed to levels above the occupational exposure limit for respiratory crystalline silica (RCS). Colleagues working close by were also placed at risk.  The research findings led to a change in working practices in the construction sector.

Read the case study to find out what this means for you

 

To receive other updates like this, please subscribe to HSL’s eBulletin on Exposure Assessment and Control.

Posted 26th October 2016:

Employer jailed for killing teen who fell from a ladder

The tragic consequences of cutting corners on cost when working at height – In this case a seventeen year old who fell to his death when working from a ladder.

 Read the full police press release

 

Fragile roofs

05/10/16: Worker suffers severe injuries in roof fall

Further information

Free leaflet – Fragile roofs

Busy Builder leaflet –Fragile roofs: What you need to know as a busy builder, contractor or maintenance worker

Busy Builder leaflet – Fragile roofs: What you need to know as a building owner, user or managing agent 

 Working at height

06/10/16: Building contractor prosecuted following worker’s fall

07/10/16: Council fined after employee was injured from fall 

Further information

Busy Builder leaflet – Construction Phase Plan

Construction Safety Topic – Assessing all work at height

Construction Safety Topic – Working at height

Construction Safety Topic – Using ladders safely

 Lifting operations

05/10/16: Worker injured after being struck by concrete skip

13/10/16: Building contractor in court after worker killed by falling load

Further information

Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 (LOLER)

Construction Safety Topic – Lifting operations

 Roadworks

20/10/16: Council and contractors fined more than £1.5 million after man dies and another seriously injured in roadworks 

Further information

Construction Information Sheet (CIS 53) – Reducing risk in temporary traffic management operations

 Carbon monoxide

21/10/16: Testing Services firm fined over worker’s CO death 

Further information

Construction Health Topic – Carbon monoxide

Struck by

07/10/16: Construction company fined after worker losses both legs

Further information

Construction Safety Topic – Dumpers

 Asbestos

03/10/16: Bolton night club owner fined over asbestos exposure 

Further information

Asbestos survey

 Overhead power lines

24/10/16: Farming and drilling contractors fined after mast strikes power line

Further information

Construction Safety Topic – Overhead power lines

 MEWPS

24/10/16: Worker seriously injured in mobile platform fall

Further information

Construction Safety Topic – MEWPS

Latest automated update(s) to Press Releases on HSE’s Website:

Building contractor in court after worker killed by falling load

A building contractor has been fined after a worker was killed when a load fell from a tower crane during a lifting operation in Colchester.

Manufacturing firm fined after worker crushed to death

Oldham manufacturing firm R Tindall (Fabricators) Ltd has been prosecuted after a worker died after he was crushed under metal pipework.

Construction firm fined after hoarding falls on passer-by

A construction company from Cambridge has been fined after temporary hoarding from one of their sites fell onto a member of public walking along the high street.

Metal company fined after worker loses foot

A Bedfordshire metal company has been fined for safety breaches after a worker suffered severe leg injuries and lost most of his foot.

Torbay plumber sentenced after illegal gas work

An illegal gas fitter has been prosecuted after he installed a gas boiler and left it in a potentially dangerous state because he did not commission it.

Council fined after employee was injured from fall

A Yorkshire council has been fined after an employee was injured when he fell from a ladder.

Construction company fined after worker losses both legs

A Cornish construction company has been fined after their worker had to have both legs amputated, around the knee, after being crushed by a dumper truck.

Tyre explosion seriously injures worker

A tyre maintenance company has been fined after a tyre exploded seriously injuring a worker.

Building contractor prosecuted following worker’s fall

A building contractor from Wokingham has been prosecuted after a worker fell and punctured his lung while carrying out demolition work.

Concrete company fined after worker suffers head injuries

A concrete company in Ilkeston, has been fined a worker after a worker suffered head injuries.

Landlord given suspended prison sentence over gas failings

A Durham landlord has been given a suspended prison sentence following his failure to maintain or check the gas fittings in one of his properties

Environmental services firm fined for safety failings

A Lancashire based environmental services company has been fined after a worker suffered serious injuries when his arm was crushed by machinery.

The makers of Star Wars: The Force Awakens have been sentenced after failing to protect the actors and workers while on set during filming at Pinewood Studio, Slough, Buckinghamshire.

Harrison Ford suffered a broken leg and deep lacerations when he was knocked off his feet and pinned to the floor of the Millennium Falcon set, as a prop door closed on him. HSE’s investigation found that there was no automatic emergency cut off, to protect those on set, instead relying on the reactions of the prop operator(s) to bring the door to a stop.

Aylesbury Crown Court heard how a combination of preventable events, starting with how the door was designed, led to the incident.

During dress rehearsals on the 12 June 2014 Harrison Ford walked back towards the entrance ramp of the Millennium Falcon and pressed the prop door button to ‘close’ the door. As the cameras were not rolling he did not expect it to close. The production crew member who was operating the prop believed they were in full rehearsal and closed the door.

The door’s steel frame was overlaid with sheets of metal and had a tapered edge. It’s operation moved from ceiling to floor in a sharp downward motion. It did not have any automated safety mechanisms to cut out if a person was unexpectedly under the door.

The risk of the door causing a serious injury or death had been highlighted by one of the health and safety officers for the production company. Foodles Production (UK) Ltd should have put a system in place to ensure the actors and production workers were protected. A different design with inbuilt safety features or using a different material could have guarded against any possible miscommunication on a busy film set.

Foodles Production (UK) Ltd, who had pleaded guilty at a previous hearing to Section 2 and Section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, were today fined £1.6 million and ordered to pay costs of £20,861.22 at Aylesbury Crown Court.

HSE’s Divisional Director Tim Galloway said: “This incident was foreseeable and preventable and could have resulted in more serious injury or even death.

“The power and speed of the door was such that, had Mr Ford or anyone else had been struck on the head by the door as it closed, they might easily have been killed.

“It was only the almost instantaneous actions of the prop operator in hitting the emergency stop that prevented the door from continuing to press down on Mr Ford as he lay on the floor.

“I think everyone would accept that all the people who work in the film industry have a right to know that the risks they take to entertain us, including when making action movies, are properly managed and controlled.”

Leonhard Lang: Defibrillation electrode SCHILLER DF87C and DF56C

Defibrillators, non-implantable

Model: DF87C, DF56C

For Further Information MHRA reference: 2016/010/028/299/006

Automatic external defibrillator (AED) LIFEPAK CR Plus and LIFEPAK EXPRESS – risk of failure to deliver a shock.

Manufactured by Physio-Control – risk of delay to defibrillation due to an intermittent component failure. Specific serial numbers are affected

Update: First published.

For further information on this published alert:

https://www.gov.uk/drug-device-alerts/automatic-external-defibrillator-aed-lifepak-cr-plus-and-lifepak-express-risk-of-failure-to-deliver-a-shock

Researchers found that women who had worked night shifts (including those who had done so for up to 30 years) had no increased risk of breast cancer compared with women who had never worked shifts.

In the Million Women Study, EPIC-Oxford, and UK Biobank respectively, 673, 28 and 67 women who reported night shift work developed breast cancer. The combined relative risks taking all ten studies together were 0.99 for any night shift work, 1.01 for 20 or more years of night shift work, and 1.00 for 30 or more years night shift work.

The findings contradict a 2007 review by the International Agency for Research on Cancer that said shift work disrupted the “body clock” and was a probable cause of cancer. This was mainly based on animal and lab studies.

The latest work builds on a Canadian study of 1,134 breast cancer sufferers and 1,179 women of similar ages without the disease which found the risk factor was apparent only in those working nights for more than half a normal working life.

Dr Ruth Travis, lead author and a Cancer Research UK-funded scientist at the Cancer Epidemiology Unit at the University of Oxford, said: “We found that women who had worked night shifts, including long-term night shifts, were not more likely to develop breast cancer, either in the three new UK studies or when we combined results from all ten studies that had published relevant data.”

The research, Night Shift Work and Breast Cancer Incidence: Three Prospective Studies and Meta-analysis of Published Studies, was funded by the HSE, Cancer Research UK and the UK Medical Research Council.

Sarah Williams, Cancer Research UK’s health information manager, said: “This study is the largest of its kind and has found no link between breast cancer and working night shifts. We hope [this] news reassures women who work night shifts.”

Professor Andrew Curran, chief scientific adviser for the HSE, which commissioned the study, added: “This study has shown that night shift work, including long-term shift work, has little or no effect on breast cancer incidence in women. However, there are a number of other known risks with shift work that employers must take into consideration when protecting their workers’ health and safety.”

On average, one in seven (14%) women in the UK have ever worked nights and one in 50 (2%) have worked nights for 20 or more years. Each year in the UK around 53,300 women are diagnosed with breast cancer and around 11,500 die from the disease.