INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OFRISK AND SAFETY MANAGEMENT

Visit our website at www.iirsm.orgIssue 05/2016

Healthy working makes senseBusiness leaders instinctively know that their employees make a vital contribution to business success. How often do we hear bosses say that their biggest asset is their people, or that they are “a people business”? Recent research by Bupa found that more than half of the companies it questioned (57%) believe the health of their employees is either extremely important or the single most important factor affecting their business’s productivity and it becoming “sustainably successful”.

Furthermore, 32% of SME leaders have confirmed they have lost money because of sickness absence, and nearly half said that if a staff member took a significant period of absence now it would affect business growth.

The impact of an employee’s health on a business is clear, but do we do enough to create and maintain healthy working cultures? Do we do enough to

support healthy staff and help foster and encourage greater staff welfare?

IIRSM recognises that while the UK has done a lot to improve safety, we have failed to pay enough attention to health. Businesses are failing to sufficiently support their employees’ health and wellbeing – Bupa’s research revealed 25% of SME leaders believe their business has become less concerned with health and wellbeing as it has grown. More than half (53%) do not provide employees with any health and wellbeing benefits, while 43% said they will never consider providing such benefits.

According to a Labour Force Survey, stress-related depression and anxiety alone accounted for 9.9 million lost working days in 2014/15 and much of that stress derived from job pressures.

Above all else, when you consider that 1.2 million working people are suffering from a work-related illness, it is clear we have a long way to go and a lot

of work still to do.Balancing the health and wellbeing

needs of employees with the goals of business will not always be easy, but with the buy-in of staff, sound management practices and a culture that supports health and wellbeing as a part of the business plan, it is possible to give an organisation the best chance of being “sustainably successful”.

IIRSM believes that supporting the health and wellbeing of employees is as critical as the great work our members do in the safety arena. It is clear that in the world of safety we have made huge strides and saved many lives. Now is the time to do the same in the health arena.

We believe the time is right to support our members, and the HSE’s 2016 strategy, in leading a charge on health and wellbeing and in the coming months we will provide more ideas and information on what can be done to change this for the better.

Domestic workers should have legal right to breaks, says ILO

11INSIDE THIS ISSUE

£850k fine over Battersea crane collapse fatalities

02 Management standards: power to influence

06 Institute news: IIRSM visits the Middle East

08

© M

EN S

yndi

cati

on

www.iirsm.org | 05/201605/2016 | www.iirsm.org 32

News Prosecutions

Chief executive Phillip PearsonHead of marketing and communicationsClare FlemingManaging editor Louis Wustemann

Editor Kellie Mundellkellie.mundell@lexisnexis.co.uk Designer Carrie Love

ADDRESSIIRSM, 77 Fulham Palace Road, London W6 8JA, UK Tel +44 (0)20 8741 9100 Fax +44 (0)20 8741 1349Website www.iirsm.orgEmail info@iirsm.org

Registered in England and WalesCharity No 1107666Company No 5310696

PUBLISHED BY LexisNexis © Reed Elsevier (UK) Limited 2016Printed by Headley Brothers Ltd, Kent

This publication is intended to be a general guide and cannot be a substitute for professional advice. Neither the authors nor the publisher accept any responsibility for loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining from acting as a result of material contained in this publication.

Reproduction, copying or extracting by any means of the whole or part of this publication must not be undertaken without the written permission of the publishers.

ISSN 1746-1359

News Prosecutions

LIFTING OPERATIONS

Hire firm pays £850,000 over Battersea crane collapse fatalities

● Two people died when a tower crane collapsed in September 2006

Ten years after a crane collapse in London killed two men, Falcon Crane Hire has been fined £750,000.

Southwark Crown Court was told that crane operator Jonathan Cloke, 37, died after falling from the crane as it collapsed. It fell onto Michael Alexa, 23, a member of the public, and also killed him.

The court heard how sections of the tower crane, which was on a housing development in Thessaly Road, Battersea, separated when 24 slew ring bolts failed due to metal fatigue. When the bolts failed the slew turret and jib separated from the mast and fell to the ground.

❝❝ These two men need not have died had Falcon Crane Hire taken the right, decisive action when the bolts failed the first time”

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigated the incident, which happened in September 2006, and found that Falcon Crane Hire had failed to investigate a similar incident that had happened just nine weeks before, when the bolts failed on the same crane and had to be replaced.

The HSE concluded that Falcon did not have a proper system for managing the inspection and maintenance of its crane fleet. Its process to investigate the

underlying causes of component failings was also inadequate.

“These two men need not have died had Falcon Crane Hire taken the right, decisive action when the bolts failed the first time,” said Mike Wilcock, the HSE’s head of operations.

On 15 March 2016, Falcon Crane Hire admitted breaching Sections 2(1) and 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act.

As well as the fine, it was ordered to pay costs of £100,000.

MENTAL HEALTH

Police stress leave up 35%

● Cases rose from 4,544 in 2010-11 to 6,129 in 2014-15 despite shrinking forces

The number of police officers and staff taking long-term sick leave for psychological reasons has gone up by over a third in the past five years, it has been revealed.

Despite overall employee numbers falling, the number of police officers and police staff taking time off for psychological reasons went up from 4,544 in 2010 to 6,129 in 2015.

The figures, which come from a freedom of information request submitted by BBC Radio 5 live, also show a steady increase in overall long-term sick leave over the same period. The government said policing was “stressful” and forces must help staff.

Data showed the number of police employees on long-term sick leave - defined by forces as either 28 or 29 days or more – rose from 19,825 in 2010-11 to 22,547 in 2014-15.

Of the 46 forces contacted, 40 provided information. West Yorkshire Police recorded the largest rise in long-term sick leave over a year – up 44% between 2013-14 and 2014-15 – from 521 days to 748.

Warwickshire Police showed the biggest decrease of 17% over the same time period.

Che Donald, of the Police Federation, said increased sickness – including for psychological reasons – was not surprising as officers often worked in “highly stressful fast-moving environments” and were exposed to “horrific situations”.

The tower crane was erected on a housing development in Thessaly Road in Battersea, London

WORK AT HEIGHT

RISK ASSESSMENT

Hackitt warns against “risk-averse” culture

Coping with risk and danger is crucial to a child’s education and should become a key part of the school curriculum, Judith Hackitt has said.

In one of her final statements as HSE chair, Hackitt warned schools against exercising “nonsensical” health and safety rules in the school place, as it prevents children from preparing for the “real world” and damages the serious work being done by the HSE.

“Overprotective parents and risk-averse teachers who do not enable children to learn to handle risk will lead to young adults who are poorly equipped to deal with the realities of the world around them, unable to discern real risk from trivia, not knowing who they can trust or believe,” she said.

“They will be a liability in any

workplace if they do not have those basic skills to exercise judgment and take responsibility for themselves.”

She made the comments during a speech to the Royal Academy of Engineering, in which she called on schools to put an end to top-down “bureaucratic” behaviour.

Hackitt argued that such trivial risks were undermining the HSE’s efforts to improve safety in dangerous industries such as construction and farming.

“We have reached a point where people expect to be looked after,” said Hackitt. “We need to look out for ourselves and take responsibility for risk, not leave it to others.”

InBriefFour appear in court after MEWP ran over worker’s feetThree companies and a site manager have been forced to pay more than £42,000 after a worker’s feet were run over by a mobile elevating work platform (MEWP).

The worker was pushing a trolley with a window on it when he was struck by a MEWP being driven by a colleague. He suffered multiple fractures in his right foot, a fracture of his left ankle and significant soft tissue damage to both feet.

The principal contractor, Longcross Construction, and subcontractors Fewell Engineering and SJT all failed to prepare suitable and sufficient risk assessments and method statements.

HSE inspectors also found that site manager Stuart Tombs had forged or fabricated site documents in an attempt to deflect responsibility.

Visit www.healthandsafetyatwork.com for more on this case.

Allan Thomson outside Manchester Crown Court

West Yorks Police recorded largest rise between 2013-15

44%

Do you agree? Visit www.linkedin.com and search Groups for IIRSM to join the discussion.

Contractors, were found guilty of offences under Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Act and for breaching Regulations 4 and 7 of the Work at Height Regulations.

Michael Smith and his company C. Smith and Sons were found guilty of offences under Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Act and for breaching both the CDM Regulations and Work at Height Regulations.

At Manchester Crown Court, Thompson was jailed was six years and ordered to pay £55,000 court costs. His company was fined £400,000. Michael Smith was jailed for eight months and ordered to pay £45,000 in costs. His company was fined £90,000.

Directors jailed over fatal fallTwo bosses have been jailed after two workers fell off a roof they were repairing on the same day.

In January 2014, four men employed by Building and Dismantling Contractors, which was awarded a demolition contract by C. Smith and Sons, began removing the roof of the former Harvey’s and Carpetright buildings in Stockport. It was made of corrugated steel sheets interspersed with plastic skylights, which had deteriorated and been covered with corrugated steel to repair the damage.

It was originally planned that plant machinery would be used to remotely bring down the structure, a method that would have entailed minimum risk to those workmen tasked with the demolition. However, between winning the contract and the work actually being carried out, the decision was taken by the boss of C. Smith and Sons, Michael Smith, that the building should instead be dismantled piece by piece, meaning workmen would be required to work at height to remove the roof sheets prior to the structure being unbolted.

On 20 January 2014, Harrower

accidentally stepped through a skylight and nearly fell. He managed to prevent himself from falling 30 feet to the concrete floor below.

The next morning another of the workers fell through a skylight, fracturing his spine, pelvis, right leg, heel and wrist.

Ambulance and police attended, but the incident was deemed to be an accident and the men were ordered to return to the roof just hours later. At 4pm the same day, Harrower fell through a skylight and suffered fatal head injuries.

On 3 February 2016, Allan Thomson (pictured above) was found guilty of gross negligence manslaughter and both he and his company, Building and Dismantling

www.iirsm.org | 05/201605/2016 | www.iirsm.org 54

News ProsecutionsNews Prosecutions

HSE

Brechin appointed interim chairHealth and Safety Executive (HSE)board member George Brechin has been appointed interim chair of the regulator now that Dame Judith Hackitt has stepped down.

Brechin, who retired in March 2012 after a decade as chief executive of NHS Fife, was previously interim chief executive of the State Hospitals Board for Scotland between January 2014 and March 2015.

A graduate in electrical engineering and electronics from the University of Glasgow, he joined the Department of Health in London in 1972. He moved to the NHS in Scotland in 1988, holding three NHS Trust chief executive posts before his appointment to NHS Fife.

He has a Companionship of the Institute of Healthcare Management and was awarded the OBE in 2013. He is also vice-chair of the Board of Trustees of the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland.

Brechin was appointed to the HSE board in April 2013 to represent the public interest, rather than employers or employees. The other seven HSE board members are: Nick Baldwin, Jonathan Baume, Isobel Garner, Martyn Thomas, Sir Paul Kenny, Frances Outram and Sarah Pinch.

The HSE said that Brechin’s appointment is “a short term arrangement“ as the process to recruit Hackitt’s permanent successor continues.

Hackitt became chair of the manufacturer’s trade body the EEF on 4 April after more than eight years at the helm of the HSE.

WORK AT HEIGHT

Solar panel installers had not been trained, court hears

● Worker fell through one of eight fragile lights ● P V Solar UK fined £153,000

A solar panel specialist has been fined £153,000 after a worker was seriously injured in a fall through a fragile roof light in Kent.

The 32 year old fractured his shin and a vertebra in the incident at a residential building in Hawkinge on 30 April 2013.

The rooflight he fell through was on an outbuilding housing a swimming pool. Though the water partially cushioned his fall, he made a heavy impact with the side and flooring around the pool, and was unable to return to work until January this year, and only then on a part-time basis.

P V Solar UK was sentenced at Canterbury Crown Court after an investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that more could and should have been done to prevent the fall.

The court heard that the injured worker was part of a three man team working on the pool building to replace faulty solar panels that were initially installed by the same company in April 2011.

The fragile roof also contained eight roof lights and he fell through one of these as he walked on the roof while carrying a panel.

The HSE established that a scaffold tower, ladder and safety harness had been provided for the panel replacement work.

But none of the installation team had received any formal training or instruction on how to use them.

Other measures could also have been taken, such as providing full scaffolding or hard covers for the rooflights.

The HSE established that although the initial installation work in 2011 was completed without incident, the safety equipment provided on that occasion was also lacking, which again placed workers at risk.

The court was also told that P V Solar was served with a Prohibition Notice by the regulator to stop unsafe work on a fragile roof in Bristol in May 2011.

The company was therefore well aware of the need to ensure that adequate provisions were in place to prevent or mitigate falls during work at height, the court was told.

P V Solar UK was fined a total of £153,000 and ordered to pay a further £29,480 in costs after pleading guilty to three separate breaches of the Work at Height Regulations.

CONFINED SPACES

Contractor jailed over trench collapse fatality

A self-employed contractor has been sentenced to six months in prison after an employee was killed when the trench he was working in collapsed on him.

William Ryan Evans was contracted to construct a drainage field comprising of infiltration pipes laid at the bottom of deep trenches. He employed two workers and a subcontractor excavator to undertake the work at Longstone Farm in Pembrokeshire.

Fifty-four year old Hywel Glyndwr Richards entered the trench to remove a clump of soil that had fallen in when it collapsed, burying him. He died at the scene.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) into the June 2012 incident found that the work was not planned appropriately and the risk assessment was not suitable or sufficient. The workers were not

appropriately trained and suitable equipment to a prevent collapse were not provided.

At Swansea Crown Court on 11 April, William Ryan Evans was found guilty of breaching Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Act and was given a six month custodial sentence.

HSE inspector Phil Nicolle said: “This tragic incident could have been prevented by undertaking a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks, providing the correct equipment or safe working methods to the workers and managing and monitoring the work to ensure it was done safely.

“Work in excavations needs to be properly planned, managed and monitored to ensure no one enters an excavation deeper than 1.2 metres without adequate controls in place to prevent a collapse.”

George’s Brechin’s tenure as interim chair is said to be a “short term arrangement”

Though the pool water cushioned the fall, the impact still resulted in a fractured shin and vertebra

REGULATION

TUC warns of Brexit risks to health and safetyThe Trades Union Congress (TUC) has published advice on the potential implications of Britain leaving the EU (known as Brexit) on employment and health and safety laws.

The briefing paper highlights the health and safety gains that have been made as a result of EU membership. It notes it is difficult to state exactly how many lives have been saved, or how many illnesses have been prevented because of EU legislation, but points out that in the year that the Framework Directive and “six-pack” of regulations came into force (1992) there were 368 worker fatalities in the UK, while last year there were 142.

However, the paper points out that there has been a plateau in the decline of workplace fatalities since 2010. The report puts this down to a decrease in UK government inspection activity.

A European Commission review of all the 24 main directives on health and safety conducted in 2015 concluded that the EU framework is coherent with few overlaps.

While the overall effects of a UK exit from the EU are unclear, the paper predicts the possibility of further health and safety deregulation.

“It is unclear what the situation will be if the UK votes to leave the EU,” it said. “The UK has, however, indicated that it wants to reduce existing EU protection including repealing a number of directives or parts of directives and removing the requirement for employers to provide eyesight tests for display screen equipment users, and the need for small, low risk businesses to make a written risk assessment.

The government’s current deregulatory proposals were written in the context of remaining within the EU. If Britain were to leave, depending on any agreement with the EU, then further reductions are certainly likely.”

InBriefChemicals burned worker’s corneasAn electropolishing company has been fined after a worker suffered ocular chemical burns.

Basingstoke Magistrates’ Court heard how Keith Brown, a 51 year old worker at Poligrat (UK) was told by his manager to dispose of some waste cleaning chemicals at its Aldershot site. The method agreed was to pour caustic pearl granules into the top of an intermediate bulk container (IBC) containing acids to help neutralise the chemicals inside.

It was during this process that an exothermic reaction occurred – the container became unstable and erupted over the worker, throwing him to the ground. His glasses were blown off and he suffered alkaline burns to his eyelids and ulcers to both corneas, including grazing and burns to his legs.

HSE investigators found that the activity and substances used in the process were not suitably or sufficiently risk assessed.

Poligrat (UK) pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act and Regulation 3(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations. It was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £1,072.

HSE budget to be slashed againThe HSE’s annual funding from central government will be cut by a further 12.5% by 2019/20, bringing the total reduction since 2009/10 to 46%, according to Health and Safety at Work magazine.

The money the HSE receives from its parent department, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), will decrease year on year throughout the current parliament. In the final year, 2019/20, the executive will receive £123.4 million, which compares to £231 million in 2009/10.

In the current year, 2016/17, the HSE will receive £141 million from the government and generate £94 million in income, which includes fees and licensing, such as Fee for Intervention.

The figures are outlined in the regulator’s business plan for 2016/17, which sets out the HSE’s objectives for the coming year.

Read more analysis at www.healthandsafetyatwork.com/hse/business-plan-reveals-further-budget-cuts.

Number of fatalities in UK in 1992 when Britain joined EU

368P V Solar was ordered to pay a fine and costs totalling

£153k

www.iirsm.org | 05/201605/2016 | www.iirsm.org 76

Management standards part 2Management standards part 2

Power to influence

Last month we introduced MSS 1000 as a universal management system standard that facilitates the creation of fully integrated management systems without boundaries, addressing the totality of the management of an organisation, irrespective of size and type. Now we look at how it promotes a holistic management of uncertainty.

The standard takes a holistic approach to managing the potential myriad of uncertainties that may confront an organisation”

4. Prospect and risk analysis

2. Classi�cation of structures and processes

3. Aspect and impact identi�cation

Management tools and

techniques

5. Prospect and risk improvement

6. P&R Improvements analysis and synthesis

7. Prospect and risk assessment review

8. Residual prospect, risk and controls acceptance

1. Prospect and risk assessment planning

Organisation/project context

Foundation planning

Stra

tegi

c pl

an

Polic

y st

atem

ent

Legi

slat

ion

&

stan

dard

s

Obj

ecti

ves

Gai

nLo

ss

UPSIDE

DOWNSIDE Potential outcome Likely outcome Actual outcome

Past or present Future

Pleasuresatisfactionadded value

creditOpportunity

Prospect(negative risk)

Threathazard

RiskPain, harm

dissatisfaction subtracted value

debit

Figure 1: Upside and downside perspective

Figure 2: Prospect and risk assessment

Balance acceptable

Prospects acceptable

Risks acceptable

MaximiseMinimise

Figure 3: Optimisation of prospect and risk

is the principal driver that delivers an organisation’s purpose. Typical prospects of improving stakeholder satisfaction include securing a given sized contract, employing personnel of a desired capability, growing the company to a particular size, capturing a given portion of the market, achieving a given level of customer satisfaction etc. Prospect is not just the mirror of risk but takes the lead in decision making processes.

Planning involves first identifying and assessing the potential prospects capable of delivering the purpose of the organisation, adding value and equitably satisfying the needs, expectations and aspirations of stakeholders while making the best use of resources. However, risks of various

types will inevitably be associated with each potential prospect adding to the complexity of decision making and the need to equitably balance the multiple prospect/risk requirements of stakeholders (see Figure 3).

Taken on its own, risk is always bad and should be avoided but inevitably risks have to be taken in order to reap the benefits from exposure to prospect – prospects and risks inextricably co-exist. Plotting prospects and the associated risks on a prospect/risk diagram can help create a good conceptual model and get things in perspective prior to making a decision (Figure 4). The realisation of prospects and risks may occur instantly or gradually over time, for example an explosion or a slow deterioration in health, the loss of a key customer or the slow decline of sales.

An acceptable balance of prospect(s) and risk(s) for a particular organisation depends on what they are and the degree that they impact stakeholder

needs, expectations and aspirations. Differing stakeholder views, their prospect and risk tolerabilities and their power to exercise influence makes decision making even more challenging and necessitate the exercise of pragmatism and good judgment.

The standard requires that organisations define their own arrangements for ensuring that stakeholder requirements are determined and that prospect and management controls are established. These should be based on or informed by appropriate qualitative or quantitative prospect and risk assessments conducted only to a degree that adds value or to comply with a stakeholder requirement, such as regulatory compliance. Prospect and risk management can never be perfect and can only be justified when it adds value.

The standard can be downloaded for free at http://bit.ly/1J9te4Q.

Ian Dalling chairs the CQI Integrated Management Special Interest Group, serves on the IIRSM Technical Committee and led the creation of MSS 1000:2015

Organisations behave like conscious superorganisms – comprising structures and processes that

collectively deliver their purpose, equitably satisfy stakeholders and make the best use of resources. Optimising performance requires management attention to be focused on the organisation’s ‘normal product/service delivery’, ‘contingency’ and ‘change’ structures and processes. An integrated management approach is essential because it is these same physical and virtual structures and processes that give rise to the multiple dimensions of performance that impact product/service quality, health, safety, environment, financial, information, security and reputation.

MSS 1000 takes a holistic approach to managing the potential myriad of uncertainties that may confront an organisation and requires that the organisation’s foundation planning first

identifies the significant stakeholders, their needs, expectations, aspirations and their power to influence the organisation. Overall success depends on seeking to reasonably maximise gain while minimising loss as judged by each of the stakeholders. Likely potential gain is expressed as prospect; while likely potential loss is expressed as risk. ‘Prospect and risk’ are a natural upside and downside pair containing an uncertainty element, and contrast with other typical upside and downside pairs such as ‘credit and debit’ and ‘opportunity and threat’ (as shown in Figure 1). The three principal classes of upside and downside terminology used in MSS 1000 are: already realised outcomes, outcomes that may potentially occur, and likely gains or losses. The identification of potential outcomes precedes the assessment of likely outcome based on or informed by actual past or present outcomes data within our knowledge.

The full cycle of prospect and risk assessment is shown in Figure 2 and is elaborated in considerable detail within the standard including examples of qualitative unified prospect and risk rating scales and how assessment can be used to drive proportionate planned monitoring.

Throughout the standard, MSS 1000 seeks to add value to an organisation by improving its physical and virtual structures and processes to increase prospect and reduce risk. Two principal complementary approaches are employed. One is the adoption of generic prospect and/or risk improvement practices, for example not assigning personnel to posts, roles, of tasks unless they are competent or appropriately supervised. The other is to conduct appropriate prospect and risk assessments as in Figure 2, in order

Pote

ntia

l gai

n

PROSP

ECT

RISK

Combination of potential gain and its likelihood of realisation

Likelihood

Pote

ntial

loss Combination of potential loss

and its likelihood of realisation.

Figure 4: Prospect and risk

to develop proportionate prospect and/or risk improving controls. These two approaches operate within a ‘plan, do, check, act’ management cycle (explained in last month’s article). It should be noted that safety and security are the only two that are concerned with preventing loss by managing risk – the others, including commerce, goods/services quality, reputation, health and environment need to address the management of prospect and risk in a holistic and balanced way.

Prospect is sometimes referred to as negative risk, but it is far too important not have an unequivocal name. It is the pursuit of gain through the intelligent and creative maximising of prospects which

www.iirsm.org | 05/201605/2016 | www.iirsm.org 98

Institute News Institute News

MIDDLE EAST VISIT

International relations ● President Siobhan Donnelly’s first official trip

to the region ● IIRSM team met more than 100 UAE members

IIRSM’s President Siobhan Donnelly was invited to speak at the Occupational Safety and Health Middle East Conference (OSHME) in Abu Dhabi, part of the world’s largest event for Homeland Security and National Resilience organised by the UAE Ministry of Interior. She presented on the root cause of adverse outcomes, which was very well received by delegates.

The OSHME Conference was organised by Occupational Safety Health Center Abu Dhabi (OSHAD) with whom IIRSM has a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). We would like to thank OSHAD for its generosity in supporting our presence and providing us with an exhibition space. We had a fantastic response with around 250 enquiries relating to membership, corporate membership and training and education. HSE Chief Executive Richard Judge, who was presenting at the conference, also visited our stand. We would like to thank our members who gave up their time to volunteer to help us on the stand over the three days.

Attending the conference gave us an opportunity to meet with the senior team at OSHAD to discuss future areas for collaboration between our two organisations in Abu Dhabi. UAE members, in particular newly elected Fellows Frank Higgins, Group HSE Manager at Arkan; Matt Cox, UAE branch Chair; and Corporate HSE Manager at Zublin International and Branch Treasurer Abdullatif Albitawi continue to forge strong relationships with regulators and have worked with the UAE Ministry of Labour (MoL) in the development of the new Federal Construction Regulations. We have had member representation in focus groups on risk management and lifting operations and IIRSM will continue to support MoL’s initiatives to improve HSE within the region.

Siobhan was accompanied on her trip by IIRSM Chief Executive Phillip Pearson and Sophie Williams, the institute’s Director of Professional Development. As this was Siobhan’s first official trip to the region, she and Sophie took the opportunity to take the short flight from Abu Dhabi to Doha, where they were greeted by Mike Preston FIIRSM, Vice

Chair of the Qatar Branch. Mike, in his role of Corporate HSE and Risk Manager for Yuksel Insaat A.S. Qatar, provided a tour of a number of their projects and Yuksel’s workers’ accommodation where they were shown around the facilities and spoke with a number of the workers.

Viv Turner FIIRSM, Qatar Branch Chair and Project HSE Manager for Midmac, took Siobhan and Sophie to visit the PSH JV Greenline, part of the Doha Metro project, where they were escorted onto the site viewing area by HSE Training Manager Darren Allport MIIRSM. Finally, they visited the CP04B Package at Lusail, which is a joint venture for the construction of two major inbound routes to the Marina District of Lusail City and will eventually be the new location for many of the Qatar Ministries. Lusail City extends across an area of 38 square kilometres and includes four exclusive islands and 19 multi-purpose residential, mixed use, entertainment, hotel and commercial districts.

IIRSM also has an MoU with Safety First in Qatar, an organisation which delivers

health and safety knowledge and training across multiple industries. IIRSM discussed future areas for collaboration in Qatar with Safety First’s general manager.

During their time in the region, the team met more than 100 members across three Branch events in Abu Dhabi, Dubai and Doha, all of whom are clearly passionate about making a real difference in the region in terms of health and safety and risk management. Phillip and Sophie also took the opportunity to update members on IIRSM’s latest initiatives.

Summarising the trip, Siobhan said: “I found the visit rewarding in terms of the massive commitment from Branch members and chairs and their will to learn and willingness to share safety systems and solutions with each other.”

The Middle East is developing rapidly and we are pleased to have had the opportunity to speak with decision makers and follow up with our partners on various initiatives, which reassured us that our strategy to help the region in the areas of education and professional membership is indeed correct.

SOCIAL MEDIA UPDATE

Join the conversation

Above left to right: Phillip Pearson (IIRSM); Elaine Harbour (HSE representative in the UAE); Richard Judge (HSE Chief Executive); and Bill Nixon (Health and Safety Laboratories), visit the IIRSM stand at OSHME. Left: Members and visitors at the Abu Dhabi Branch meeting.

MEMBERSHIP UPGRADES

New FellowsCongratulations to the following members who were awarded Fellowship in March 2016:

Abdulla Abdullayev; John Berrisford; Christopher Briggs; Dominic Charles; Stephen Charters; Kevin Chilton; Craig Edgar; Steven Greer; Stephen Gooch; John Andrew Huckstepp; Musharraf Khan; Jason Maitland; Steve Masters; Edward Joseph McFadden; Sian

Macgowan; Stewart MacKenzie; Carl Norman; Azeez Ola-Ojetola; Susan Powell; Eldeen Pozniak; Nicholas Ringrose; Gordon Roase; Mark Roberts; Rosamund Robinson; Paul Robinson; Kymm Royal; Michael Smithson; Wayne Smyth; Mark Spaven; Michael Stowell; Ian Robert Straker; David Thompson; Lee Ward; Steven Westlake and Martin Woods.

Email overload surveyWe are giving members the opportunity to participate in a university research project conducted by Lidia Tumanyan, a student at the University of Derby.

The research is to investigate the workplace problem of email overload, with the purpose of establishing the main source of email overload and whether or not using instant messaging reduces it. To take part, visit www.surveymonkey.com/r/IIRSM-Members

Aberdeen/North East of Scotland21 April, AberdeenTopic: The essentials for asbestos management and remediationRegister: hugh.canning@talktalk.net

United Arab Emirates4 May, DubaiTopic: TBCRegister: uaebranch@iirsm.org

London June, HammersmithTopic: DSE health issuesRegister: rebecca.smith@iirsm.org

United Arab Emirates8 June, Abu DhabiTopic: TBCRegister: uaebranch@iirsm.org

North West England16 June, WarringtonTopic: Unique hazards in a zoo environment (Ian McIntosh, Chester Zoo)Register: edblanchard27@btinternet.com

Nigeria 30 June, AbujaTopic: TBCRegister: nigeriabranch@iirsm.org

Register your attendance by emailing the branch or booking online at www.iirsm.org/events

UPCOMING BRANCH MEETINGS

Dates for your diary

Safety maverick

Risk – what’s in a name?

The days of the title ‘health and safety professional’ are over. If we are truly honest, most of us in the safety game are not health professionals – this is the remit of occupational hygienists and occupational health nurses and doctors.

So what is it that we really do? A better description lies in the word ‘risk’ in the sense that we are risk profilers working towards better leadership and management within organisations. Those of us in full time roles often wear many hats; safety, environmental, security, business continuity, quality, emergency planning, data protection and so on.

Thanks to the dreaded phrase “elf ‘n’ safety” people often recoil when you tell them what you do – they act as if you’ve just told them you are a tax inspector! I often find myself explaining that I am a business consultant, which seems to be generally accepted without a sharp intake of breath. It also seems to avoid unnecessary awkwardness in social situations!

It is important that the word risk and safety as well as international are included in the title of our institute as risk and safety are globally understood and transcend national legislation.

Going forward, the concept of risk management is a much better vehicle to describe the wide variety of roles that most members hold and brings a number of the fringe specialisms into the fold.

There appears to be a stigma associated with the words health and safety, and the poor press has been part of this. Time and time again, poor decisions are attributed to the “health and safety brigade”, when in fact, the poor decisions have been made by non-professionals who display risk aversion tendencies.

So perhaps it is about time to embrace the truth of our role in “risk management” and rebrand ourselves – after all, personnel departments have done this by metamorphosing into human resources, so why can’t we?

We engage with members about industry news, events, training and more on various social media channels. These platforms provide a great way for you to communicate with the institute and other members. Popular topics in March were:

● IIRSM updates, such as our MoU with the APS

● New management standard ISO 45001

● IIRSM New Quick Guide Series ● The sharing of free webinars and

presentations ● The 10 most likely risks to cause the

greatest financial impact in Europe ● Product recalls and safety notices.

Access all of our social media networks from our website at www.iirsm.org

www.iirsm.org | 05/201605/2016 | www.iirsm.org 1110

International News International News

AUSTRALIA

Humidity is ‘main cause of heat stress’

Humidity should be just as much of a factor as temperature when deciding when workers should stop working to prevent heat stress, a leading expert has claimed.

According to Dr Liz Hanna, temperature should not be the key factor in developing a ‘down tools’ policy for tradespeople in Queensland, and she recommended that workers be allowed to stop work when humidity levels reach 70% – even if the temperature is only in the high 20s.

Policies currently in place in Victoria and South Australia require that all work stops on union-affiliated job sites when the temperature reaches 35°C. But in Queensland workers are only required to take a break, rather than stop work for the rest of the day.

Dr Hanna, President of the Climate and Health Alliance, strongly urged unions to push for this rule on behalf of their members so trades people aren’t being forced to work in dangerous conditions. “If you book a builder to build your house, there’ll be a clause in there for rain delays,” she said. “We need the same for heat and humidity … If the unions aren’t looking after these people, I’m not quite sure who will.”

JAPAN

Death by overwork on the increaseClaims for compensation for ‘karoshi’ – death by overwork – rose to a record high of 1,456 in the year to March 2015, according to labour ministry data, with cases concentrated in healthcare, social services, shipping and construction, which are all facing chronic worker shortages.

Japan has no legal limits on working hours, but the labour ministry recognises two types of karoshi: death from cardiovascular illness linked to overwork, and suicide following work-related mental stress.

A cardiovascular death is likely to be considered karoshi if an employee worked 100 hours of overtime in the month beforehand, or 80 hours of overtime in two or more consecutive months in the previous six.

A suicide could qualify if it follows an individual’s working 160 hours or more of overtime in one month or more than 100 hours of overtime for three consecutive months.

USA

CEO jailed for a year for mine blast that killed 29

Former Massey Energy Chief Executive Don Blankenship has been sentenced to 12 months in prison and fined $250,000 for his role in the 2010 West Virginia coal mine explosion that killed 29 workers.

The blast that tore through the Upper Big Branch mine, about 40 miles (65 km) south of Charleston, took place about 1,000 feet underground and about three miles inside.

Federal investigators have said a fire caused by a methane or natural gas leak likely set off the coal dust explosion. Worn teeth on cutting equipment may have showered the area with sparks that set off the leak.

Blankenship, who headed Massey for a decade until 2010, was convicted in December of conspiring to falsify dust samples at the Upper Big Branch mine.

The death toll was the highest in a US mine accident since 91 workers died in the 1972 Idaho silver mine fire.

Sixty-five year old Massey is believed to be the first chief executive of a major US corporation to be convicted of workplace safety-related charges brought after a deadly industrial accident.

NEW ZEALAND

Director given home detention after fatality

The boss of a steel construction company has been sentenced to four months’ home detention over the death of a worker who died after he was buried when a trench he was working in collapsed.

Rodney Bishop, of SteelCon Construction, was also fined $56,000 and ordered to pay reparation of $121,320.

In May 2014, Michael Haines was helping to install a concrete effluent transfer tank and pipes at a farm at Te Poi, Matamata. The 34 year old was clearing dirt in the area where the tank pit joined to the four-metre-deep pipe trench when the face of the trench collapsed and approximately five cubic metres of soil with an estimated weight of eight tonnes fell and buried him. Despite immediate efforts to rescue him he died.

WorkSafe New Zealand’s investigation found that the trench had not been shored up by the installation of appropriate panels to prevent collapse. It had been cut with vertical sides and not “battered” – where the sides are cut back at a safe slope to ensure the face remains stable.

There had also not been any geotechnical assessment of the site to check the stability of the soil before work began.

USA

OSHA lowers silica dust exposure limit

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has lowered the exposure levels of silica dust in the USA for the first time.

Under the new rules, the exposure of silica dust will be restricted to 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air over an eight hour time period. Previously the limit was 250 micrograms per cubic metre for construction and 100 micrograms for all other industries. The construction industry has been given until June 2017 to comply with the new order.

According to OSHA, 2.3 million US workers are annually exposed to silica dust and the new rule would save at least 600 lives a year.

NEW ZEALAND

New legislation comes into forceThe beginning of April saw the enactment of New Zealand’s own Health and Safety at Work Act.

The long awaited Act came about as a result of the safety recommendations made following the River Pike investigation.

The Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 will take a descriptive approach similar to the UK and carries a fine of up to $600,000 or five years in prison for a category 1 violation where a dutyholder recklessly endangers a person to risk of death or serious injury.

Commenting on how the new legislation will affect businesses, WorkSafe’s Chief Executive, Gordon MacDonald, said: “It’s not WorkSafe’s job to come around and spot risk and people respond to that and put things right – people should be taking proactive action.”

Workers in New Zealand are twice as likely to be killed or suffer serious harm in the workplace compared with those in Australia, and six times as likely as those in the UK.

On average, each year 75 people die on the job in New Zealand.

“Identify your risks, identify who could be harmed, how badly and then devise sensible measures to mitigate those risks,” added MacDonald, who was previously Director of Hazardous Installations at the UK’s Health and Safety Executive.

More information is available at www.business.govt.nz/worksafe/hswa

SINGAPORE

Interim safety measures in wake of rail accident

No trains should run in automatic mode for the sections of the track where employees are working on the adjacent track walkway, the Manpower Ministry and Land Transport Authority have ordered.

In a joint press statement after a train killed two maintenance workers on a track near Pasir Ris station, the government issued the rail operator with a raft of measures to enhance safety for on-track work.

The interim instructions are to strengthen existing safety procedures to prevent the recurrence of a similar incident while investigations are carried out, it said.

CHINA

At least 43 dead in four mine accidents

A collapse at a coal mine in the northern province of Shanxi in March killed 19 miners. Three hours later, one miner was killed and one was listed as missing after another accident in Gansu, according to Xinhua news agency.

There were 129 miners working underground at the time of the Shanxi incident, while 18 miners were working during the incident at the mine in Gansu.

Earlier in March, a gas explosion at a coal mine in the north eastern province of Jilin left 12 people dead, and in January, 11 workers were killed after a coal mine collapsed in northwest Shaanxi province.

INDIA

Flyover collapse in Kolkata kills at least 26 and injures nearly 100 A section of a 1.2 mile-long flyover under construction in the Indian city of Kolkata (Calcutta) collapsed recently, killing at least 20 people.

Rescuers have said there is little hope of finding any more survivors from the disaster, which also almost 100 people injured. Images circulated on social media showed residents using their bare hands to help find victims.

Within hours of concrete being poured into a framework of steel girders, a 100-metre stretch of the overpass collapsed, crushing pedestrians and cars on the road at lunchtime on Thursday, 31 March, leaving an enormous pile of concrete slabs and twisted metal rods.

Milan Sheikh, an injured builder, told news agency AFP he had been working on the structure before it collapsed and had seen bolts come out of the metal girders.

“We were cementing two iron girders for the pillars, but the girders couldn’t take the weight of the cement,” he said. “The bolts started coming out this morning and then the flyover came crashing down.”

Indian police have detained five workers from IVRCL Infrastructure – the company constructing the flyover – who

are being questioned over possible culpable homicide, punishable with life imprisonment, and criminal breach of trust, which carries a prison sentence of up to seven years. Police also sealed the Hyderabad-based company’s Kolkata office.

IVRCL signed a contract in 2007 to build the overpass, and was far behind schedule for the project’s completion.Many of the construction workers were thought to have been living and sleeping on the site.

In a statement the day after the incident, IVCRL said: “We are also shocked that flyover collapsed and want to know why it happened. This is an accident, how can we fix responsibility on someone?”

People tried to move concrete with their bare hands

GLOBAL

Domestic workers should have right to rest The International Labour Organization (ILO) is campaigning to ensure the right to sufficient rest for live-in staff after it was revealed more than half of domestic workers worldwide do not have any legal right to weekly limits on working hours.

A new ILO factsheet focuses on the difficult conditions experienced by live-in domestic workers who, in some countries, work more than 60 hours per week with no legislation regulating their right for adequate rest.

ILO experts stress the negative impacts on health for domestic workers working excessively long hours with little or no rest, sometimes combined with insufficient and interrupted sleep. It notes research showing it can lead to the increased risk of type 2 diabetes,

heart disease and depression, to mention only a few.

They point out that physical and mental fatigue resulting from working excessive hours not only affects workers’ ability to perform their tasks but can also lead to increased risks of workplace accidents.

Half of live-in helpers do not have rights to breaks

© X

inhu

a N

ews

Age

ncy/

REX

/Shu

tter

stoc

k

© is

tock

phot

o/Va

lent

in C

asar

sa

www.iirsm.org | 05/201605/2016 | www.iirsm.org 1312

BangladeshBangladesh

On the frontlineFollowing two devastating garment factory tragedies in Bangladesh that killed more than 1,200 people, we find out the lessons learned from the fire service.

are learning a lot, which is good because factories are changing a lot. They are installing new things, like fire doors and early detection systems. Most owners are positive, they want their factories to be safe, and we are able to make them understand why safety also makes business sense.

“Since receiving the training, we have been taking our skills to fire stations in all seven divisions of Bangladesh,” Arman adds. “In the last two years I have inspected more than 600 garment factories. We created our own training module and the 16 of us have trained more than 100 additional inspectors, bringing the total number of trained fire inspectors to 140. This means that over half of our inspection workforce is now professionally trained in inspecting industrial establishments. We take a weekly exam to make sure we do not forget what we have learnt.”

Initiatives from the government of Bangladesh, the industry, trade unions and development organisations are making a real difference, says Maurice Brooks, coordinator of the ILO Fire and Building Safety project.

“The increased focus on fire awareness and prevention, coupled with the improved capacity of the fire service, has already reduced the number of fires and the loss of lives and property,” explains Brooks. “This is good not just for the garment industry, but other sectors too, as well as society as a whole.”

The training also covered the inherent safety risks in factories and how to work with factory management to minimise them.

“If I could give all factory owners one piece of advice it would be this – you can reduce fire danger by over 90% just through five simple measures: never block exits, take a dedicated approach to fire drills, have proper storage systems, use good quality electrical equipment and undertake periodic maintenance,” Arman concludes.

With thanks to the ILO for granting permission to publish this impact story.

We take a weekly exam to make sure we do not forget what we have learnt”

“The Tazreen fire was very difficult,” recalls senior station officer Shams Arman, of the

factory fire that broke out in Dhaka in 2012, killing 112 people and injuring many more. It was a harsh wake up call to the fire danger present in ready-made garment factories.

“We received delayed information, there was a huge scarcity of water and the only access to the factory was via a single, narrow one-way road,” says Arman.

Less than six months later Rana Plaza, a building housing five garment factories, collapsed, killing 1,136 people. The tragedy highlighted a different challenge for the fire service: those related to problems with structures.

“The Rana Plaza building collapse was challenging, but for different reasons, mainly insufficient rescue equipment and crowd management,” Arman adds. “We directly rescued over 250 people alive though, and helped others to rescue many more. We are now working to help factory owners make sure incidents like those do not happen again.”

To help him undertake this specialist work, Arman underwent training – supported by the International Labour Organization (ILO) – focusing on fire and building safety in garment factories. Forty inspectors were trained, and 16 were equipped with extra skills to help them train others. The training was provided through the ILO’s Improving Fire and Building Safety project, funded by the US Department of Labor.

This new work requires the Bangladesh Fire Service to visit factories almost every day, inspecting buildings and conducting training.

“The training provided by the ILO was of high quality. It equipped us with the technical skills to see the challenges in industrial situations, which have multiple hazards different to those typically found in households. The topics we found particularly useful were labour rights, industrial building design, separation and segregation systems and what hazardous materials are found in ready-made garment factories,” says Arman. ©

Key

ston

eUSA

-ZU

MA

/REX

/Shu

tter

stoc

k

“Before the training, we did not know about different industrial building structures and the strengths and weaknesses of each design. We did not know how to do occupancy calculations, which are critical because there are so many more people on factory floors. We

www.iirsm.org | 05/201605/2016 | www.iirsm.org 1514

Members’ Pages Members’ Pages

If you are looking for advice, call the health and safety information helpline with your questions on +44 (0)1296 678 465 or email iirsm.helpline@alcumusgroup.com for information on any health and safety related topic. Here are just a few of your recent queries.

Q&AsOCULAR CHEMICAL BURNS

I understand that under Section 5 of the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR), a chemical or hot metal burn to the eye or any penetrating injury to the eye should be reported.

How do we define a chemical burn to the eye? Does a splash of chemical in the eye considered as a chemical burn? If an employee receives a splash of chemical in the eye but washes it under water for some 15-30 minutes and then resumes work with some mild irritation to the eye for some hours, is that considered as a chemical burn?

The HSE advises that the following eye injuries are reportable under RIDDOR:

● if a burn causes significant damage to the eye – this is elaborated on by the HSE to include significant harm as a consequence of a burn, regardless of the surface area of the burn

● if a doctor diagnoses that the effects of any injury to the eye is likely to be permanent or result in reduced sight.

While a definition of a chemical burn is not given in the regulations, the classification of chemical ocular burns can vary depending on the type of chemical (acid or alkali), and also the type of damage which occurs. This damage may not always be instantaneous – it may develop over a period of time, according to A New Classification of Ocular Surface Burns from the Journal of Ophthamology (see http://bit.ly/1S7Qliu).

A publication by the Superior Health Council on human exposure to caustic and/or corrosive substances (acids and bases) similarly states the liquid splashes or corrosive aerosols may result in chemical burns to the cornea or conjunctiva which can be painful and also cause corneal opacification. A more long-term complication is known as dry-eye, or keratoconjunctivitis.

If the extent of an injury is unclear, or a prognosis has not yet been established, you are not required to make precautionary reports of specified injuries as it is likely that the accident will require reporting if the operative is incapacitated for seven days. As such, it may be necessary to consult a healthcare professional in order to determine a prognosis.

DEACTIVATED FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS

We acquired a ground level building in December 2006 and only recently discovered it has a fire alarm system. This was discovered during a visit from the fire service. It would appear the previous occupiers did not use the system as it had not been activated.

After carrying out a fire risk assessment at time of acquisition it was decided no alarm was required as there was very little chance of fire. Even if there was a fire the risk to any person was negligible as there was nothing that could catch fire anyway of any great significance and the premises could be vacated within 30 seconds. Means of warning of a fire could be achieved by either, very basically, shouting fire or ringing a bell, the building is small enough for all to hear such a warning.

The alarm system we have found would require six monthly checks. As we do not feel that an alarm is necessary, can we remove the system?

The government’s fire risk assessment series for premises such as small offices and shops states that “in some small, open-plan, single-storey offices and shops, a fire may be obvious to everyone as soon as it starts. In these cases, where the number and position of exits and the travel distance to them is adequate, a simple shout of ‘fire’ or a simple manually operated device, such as a gong or air horn that can be heard by everybody when operated from any single point within the building, may be all that is needed. Where a simple shout or manually operated device is not adequate, it is likely that an electrical fire warning system will be required.”

As you have identified by your fire risk assessment that the existing fire warning system has not been activated and will not be required, in line with the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 and BS 5839 you should ensure this decision satisfies the requirements of guidance documents that support fire safety legislation, any authority responsible for enforcing fire safety legislation that applies to the premises and relevant parties such as the property insurer.

Because the system is deactivated and continued reliability is not an issue, the requirement for recommended testing and

inspection under BS 5839 will not apply. This document simply states that ‘if this recommendation is not implemented, it should be considered that the system is no longer compliant with this part of BS 5839.’ On this basis, it is possible to leave the fire alarm in-situ, ensuring appropriate arrangements are in place for making all building users aware of alternative fire procedures. Leaving the fire alarm in-situ will also provide a means of electronic fire detection should a review to the fire risk assessment be undertaken in the future and the decision is made to recommission the system.

We would strongly advise that you contact your local fire authority/service for further advice should your final decision be to remove the fire alarm system.

For more on fire safety in the workplace, visit http://bit.ly/1SNmUFC. The HSE’s fire safety toolbox guide is available at www.hse.gov.uk/toolbox/fire.htm

COMMUTING ACCIDENTS

According to my own research, a commuting accident is an accident occurring on the habitual route, in either direction, between the place of work and:

● the worker’s principal or secondary residence;

● the place where the worker usually takes his or her meals; or

● the place where he or she usually receives his or her remuneration; which results in death or personal injury.What are the implications of a

commuting accident from an employer’s point of view? Has the term ‘place of work’ ever been defined?

Though this definition of the term is both practical and useful, according to the HSE document ‘Driving at Work’, health and safety law does not apply to people commuting unless they are travelling between home and somewhere which is not their regular place of work, for example a site visit.

From the employer’s perspective

there may well be a need for points to be included in the employment contract to cater for an employee that does commute (for example to negotiate work hours or to highlight the need for a personal vehicle, especially if the type of work involves regular travelling (additional to the commute). As a general duty of care, if employees commute to work, the employer may decide to ask for confirmation of roadworthy vehicles which are taxed and insured. However, this is not a legal requirement as the employee is not considered to be at work.

Another aspect of a commuting accident that an employer would need to consider is the result of such an accident occurring. It should be highlighted that regardless of the time taken off work, most road traffic accidents experienced during a commute or travel to another place of work would not usually not require a RIDDOR report.

In regards to a definition for the term ‘place of work’ the HSE states that ‘workplace’ means “any premises or part of a premises which are made available to any person as a place of work. It does not cover domestic premises, but also includes the common parts of shared buildings, private roads and paths on industrial estates and business sparks.”

COSHH RISK ASSESSMENTS

My company repairs mobile phones using Lithium-Ion batteries. Thanks to human error they are occassionally pierced, which releases smoke and fumes into the atmosphere. I have carried out a risk assessment to take into account the small amount of smoke and fumes, which states that we have to evacuate the area, turn the air conditioning on to its full fan speed as well as the LEV systems, and open all the doors to the area to allow the smoke and fumes to vent until they have dissipated out of the area.

We only allow the staff back in when the area has been deemed safe. If any of the staff complain that they fell unwell then we make sure that they do not go back into the area until they feel ok. Do you think that there is anything more that we can do, taking into account that this is an occasional occurrence?

As well as your risk assessment we would also recommend that a specific Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) risk assessment is undertaken to account for any exposure to hazardous substances and/or mixtures during operations such as the handling and disposal of the

pierced battery. Consideration will also need to be given to ‘others’ potentially affected by the measures taken during the evacuation, for example by providing necessary alarms warning and signage. The results of such an assessment will provide you with additional requirements or control measures that need to be considered to prevent any further risk of injury or ill-health occurring. COSHH Regulation 13 (1) requires employers to “protect the health of his employees from an accident, incident or emergency related to the presence of a substance hazardous to health at the workplace, the employer shall ensure that:

● procedures, including the provision of appropriate first-aid facilities and relevant safety drills (which shall be tested at regular intervals), have been prepared which can be put into effect when such an event occurs;

● information on emergency arrangements, including:

● (i) details of relevant work hazards and hazard identification arrangements; and

● (ii) specific hazards likely to arise at the time of an accident, incident or emergency, is available; and

● suitable warning and other communication systems are established to enable an appropriate response, including remedial actions and rescue operations, to be made immediately when such an event occurs.

The COSHH Approved Code of Practice and guidance is available at www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l5.pdf. A link to COSHH FAQs is at www.hse.gov.uk/coshh/further/faq.htm and for the HSE’s document A Brief Guide to COSHH, visit www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg136.pdf.

Other aspects to consider will include disconnect the device from the power supply, if it is deemed safe to do so, the provision of information, instruction and training to employees on actions to take in such an event, liaison with the emergency services or a designated response team and the maintenance of control measures to ensure that the equipment necessary for control is maintained in an efficient state, in efficient working order, in good repair and in a clean condition will also be important.

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES

Can you please tell me if products described as heavy metals in product packaging (for example Hg, Pb, CrVI and Cd) are in the “Substances of very high concern” (SVHC) listing under the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) Regulations and are there any common statements to forward to clients if levels are below a certain limit?

Not all of these heavy metals can be found on the ECHA Candidate list for SVHCs. Currently Lead and Cadmium are found on the list (see the full candidate list at http://echa.europa.eu/candidate-list-table)

According to the EU Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive (RoHS) Compliance Status: “EU RoHS status is declared per Directive 2011/65/EU and its subsequent amendments. Homogeneous materials of parts that are compliant to this legislation have less than 0.1% by weight each of lead, mercury, hexavalent chromium, PBB, and PBDE, and 0.01% by weight of cadmium. In situations where an exemption applies, the preceding limits, corresponding to the exempted substance(s), may be higher.”

Opinion pollIn one of her last statements as HSE chair, Dame Judith Hacklitt said coping with risk and danger is crucial to a child’s education and should become a key part of the school curriculum.

This month we’re asking:

Do you think schools are too risk averse?

Have your say: visit www.linkedin.com and search Groups for IIRSM and request to join.

05/2016 | www.iirsm.org16

Interview

Bikramjit Singh MIIRSM A project health, safety and environment manager for Al Shafar General Contracting (ASGC) in Abu Dhabi, Bikramjit Singh has always had an interest in health and safety. Here he tells us more about his career.

How did you become involved in health and safety?Fourteen years ago, while I was studying in India, I was sent on a basic safety training course, which I really enjoyed. I went on to study for an International Diploma in Health and Safety. The course really interested me because it is such a diverse profession. I was particularly keen to get involved in the construction industry. What I’ve learnt over the years has now been put into practice and I enjoy helping others to learn to keep safe in their working environment.

How did you become involved in health and safety?My first job was as an HSE officer in India. I was promoted to senior HSE officer and then to HSE manager. I am really pleased to have chosen this career.

What’s the most challenging problem you’ve had to overcome?I used to find it difficult to keep everyone involved in my projects interested in safety, particularly new employees. I set about implementing a positive health and safety culture within my current organisation, ASGC, through training and awareness.

The main problem I had with new employees was often a language barrier, and in turn trying to make them understand what is required of them regarding health and safety.

We are lucky that ASGC has multilingual employees to assist with the health, safety and environment (HSE) awareness inductions and are available for training purposes. We provide ongoing training using different learning techniques and best practice alerts.

Our HSE induction consists of a controlled walkaround the project, pointing out the dangers and restricted areas, explaining that they should keep to their respective areas when working, fire drills and what to do upon hearing the

siren; we point out the assembly points and the first aid clinic, explain heat stress, safe work at height, safe systems of work, standard operating procedures, work permit systems, engineering controls and emergency procedures. We also follow up with training on a weekly basis and we present workshops and training with visual aids and presentation written in different languages for a more practical session.

What’s the most memorable experience you’ve had in your career?Estidama is Abu Dhabi’s sustainability programme commitment to reach a ‘pearl’ rating for construction projects. The build that I was praised for is the Abu Dhabi Marina Bloom Development, which is a five star Marriott Hotel with serviced apartments, two residential buildings and a floating restaurant. The project came under the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) which provides

strict guidelines. We are now awaiting our seventh CEMP audit from the government of Abu Dhabi – we passed the last six and I was praised for the cleanliness of the project and the training that we have given to the whole workforce on environmental issues and waste management.

What’s the biggest challenge facing the health and safety profession?Mainly those who do not understand safety, and people who are from different cultures and backgrounds who are new to the country. Ongoing training in different languages will help workers adapt in order to adopt a positive attitude towards health and safety. Every project faces new challenges and learning curves as each building design is different.

What issues can you see coming up in your sector?People learning the new rules and legislation from international sources.

What’s the best piece of advice you’ve ever been given?My father and teacher at school always said that hard work and study pays off. They both made sure I listened and guided me in my studies.

Why did you join IIRSM?

The institute provides me with extensive knowledge; I find the CPD programme very useful, as well as the extensive knowledge of health and safety systems – it all really helps with challenges I face in various projects, and I am proud to be a member of IIRSM.

What do you like most about the institute?I am constantly using the website to update my knowledge. I develop professionally by listening and learning and constantly improving my qualifications.

Where do you see yourself in five years’ time?I would like to improve myself by gaining more qualifications – I’m currently studying for a PhD in health, safety and environment. I really love my job with my current employer because I can put into practice all my experience thanks to the multiple projects that ASGC works on.

I enjoy guiding, training and keeping people safe in the workplace – every day is different. I would certainly like to progress to a higher position within ASGC.

❝❝ I develop professionally by listening and learning and constantly improving my qualifications”