master dissertation 11
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
1/125
i
HEALTH AND SAFETY RISK ASSESSMENT INTHE UK EVENT PRODUCTION INDUSTRY
Untangling the red tape: What is the attitude
towards the subjective nature of interpretation
of health and safety legislation in the events
industry?
OLIVER ADAMS
A Management Research Paper submitted in partial fulfilment of the
Degree BA (Hons) Music, Theatre and Entertainment Management
The Liverpool Institute for Performing Arts
May 2014
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
2/125
ii
COPYRIGHT NOTICE
The contents of this document are copyright Oliver Adams 2014.
All rights reserved.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
3/125
iii
DISCLAIMER
Content of this paper is intended for educational purposes only and is no substitute
for full legal advice. All facts are correct to the best of the authors knowledge and
belief. Any advice given, or comments made, are personal opinions of the author
only and do not constitute legal advice as individual circumstances may differ.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
4/125
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my parents for their constant support throughout the process;
Maria Barrett for her constructive criticism and frequent encouragement; my
classmates and friends for their support and for providing frequent social relief; and
my interviewees for their willingness to take part.
I would also like to acknowledge the Learning Resources Centre at the Liverpool
Institute for Performing Arts for having an excellent selection of resources, Aldham
Robarts library at Liverpool John Moores University for providing such a pleasant
work space and Apple Inc. for having such dependable systems.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
5/125
v
ABSTRACT
Health and safety obligations in the live event production industry have become a
topic for increasing discussion in the last two decades. This research paper examines
the industry attitude towards the subjective nature of health and safety legislation
and the practice of risk assessment together with the consequential perception of
these. It aims to identify any potential weaknesses in legislation, guidelines or
practice, the reasons for these and provides recommendations towards solutions.
The relevant legislation is outlined whilst examining how it may be connected to
attitudes towards health and safety within the industry and how this perception is
changing. It has been determined that that there are no fixed rules regarding health
and safety risk assessment but that there are some items which must be included.
Also suggested is the fact that broad terminology in the legislation may invite
subjectivity during the completion of risk assessment and that there appears to be a
broadly negative attitude towards health and safety within the industry.
The process by which qualitative data was collected, via individual interviews
conducted in person, via video-conference and via telephone call, has been detailed
and qualified. These interviews used semi-structured questions to explore the views
of industry professionals regarding the impact of legislation on attitudes towards and
perception of health and safety and risk assessment. The responses of interviewees
then identified a lack of clear understanding of risk assessment procedure at low
hierarchal levels and also amongst personnel completing risk assessments.
Based on suggestions made during research and examples set by the construction
industry, the concluding recommendations suggest the compulsory introduction of a
dedicated health and safety operative for every event, an event site health and
safety induction for all personnel entering the site and the acquisition of accredited
health and safety qualifications for employed staff.
Key words: live events, health and safety, risk assessment, health and safety
legislation
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
6/125
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................... viii
GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS................................................................................ ix
1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................. 3
2.1. INTRODUCTION TO LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................... 3
2.2. INTRODUCTION TO THE EVENT INDUSTRY AND EVENT PRODUCTION .......... 3
2.3. THE RISK ASSESSMENT PROCESS .................................................................... 4
2.4. RESPONSIBLE PERSON(S) ................................................................................ 6
2.5. INDUSTRY PERCEPTION ................................................................................... 7
2.6. LEGISLATION .................................................................................................... 9
2.7. CRITICISMS OF RISK ASSESSMENT ................................................................ 12
2.8. CHAPTER SUMMARY ..................................................................................... 14
2.9. CHAPTER CONCLUSION ................................................................................. 15
3. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................... 16
3.1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 16
3.2. METHODS ...................................................................................................... 16
3.2.1. Chosen Data Type .................................................................................. 16
3.2.2. Sample .................................................................................................... 17
3.2.3. Data Collection ....................................................................................... 19
3.2.4. Interview Content .................................................................................. 21
3.2.5. Ethics ...................................................................................................... 22
3.2.6. Procedure ............................................................................................... 22
3.3. IMPORTANCE AND LIMITATIONS .................................................................. 23
3.3.1. Importance of Study .............................................................................. 23
3.3.2. Limitations of the study ......................................................................... 24
DATA ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 25
3.4. REVISIONS TO METHODOLOGY ..................................................................... 26
3.5. CHAPTER SUMMARY ..................................................................................... 26
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
7/125
vii
4. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 28
4.1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 28
4.2. EFFECTS OF HIERARCHY ................................................................................ 28
4.3. PERCEPTION .................................................................................................. 29
4.4. LEGISLATION .................................................................................................. 32
4.4.1. Awareness and Understanding .............................................................. 32
4.4.2. Standardisation ...................................................................................... 33
4.4.3. Terminology ........................................................................................... 34
4.5. COMPETENCE ................................................................................................ 36
4.6. SUING CULTURE ............................................................................................ 37
4.7. REFLECTION ON CONTENT OF LITERATURE REVIEW .................................... 38
4.8. REFLECTION ON INTERVIEWEE RESPONSES .................................................. 39
4.9. CHAPTER SUMMARY ..................................................................................... 39
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................ 41
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................. 44
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................. 50
APPENDIX 1: Explanation of production department operations and associated
risks .......................................................................................................................... 50
APPENDIX 2: Common problems with health and safety risk assessment.............. 53
APPENDIX 3: Interview Transcripts .......................................................................... 54
APPENDIX 4: Construction Design and Management Regulations (CDM) ............ 112
APPENDIX 5: Recommendations for Future Improvement ................................... 113
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
8/125
viii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NUMBER PAGE NUMBER
Table 1: Summary of professional activity and reasons for choosing interview
participants .................................................................................................... 19
Table 2: Interview questions with rationale ................................................................ 22
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
9/125
ix
GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS
TERM DEFINITION
BETA testing: A trial of machinery, software or other products in the final
stages of development, carried out by a party unconnected
with the development process (Oxford Dictionary online,
2014)
CDM: Construction Design and Management (Regulations)
CDMC: Construction Design and Management Co-ordinator
CITB: Construction Industry Training Board
COSHH: Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (Regulations)
CSCS: Construction Skills Certification Scheme
ESAG: Local authority Event Safety Advisory Group; conducted by
event managers with local emergency services and other
relevant parties
ESP: Event Safety Passport (see Safety Passport)
Flying: The act of suspending equipment, structure or set for a
performance (see also: Truss)
Genie: Access equipment brand making scissor lifts and cherry pickers
H and S, H&S: Health and Safety
HASAWA: Health and Safety at Work etc. Act
Hi-vis: High visibility clothing
HSE: Health and Safety Executive
IOSH: Institution of Occupational Safety and Health
LOLER: Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations
MHSWR: Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations
NEBOSH: National Examination Board in Occupational Safety and Health
PAT: Portable Appliance Testing (electrical)
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
10/125
x
PPE: Personal Protective Equipment
PSA: Production Standards Association
RIDDOR: Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences
Regulations
Rig/Derig: The act of installing or uninstalling equipment into or out of
a venue for use in at event
Rigging: The departmental term for the construction of truss and the
act of flying performed by a Rigger
Safe:Contractor: Health and safety pre-qualification assessment scheme
(Santia, 2014)
Safety Passport: Nationally recognized standard of health and safety training
(Safety Pass Alliance, 2014)
Tallescope: Access equipment
Truss: A metal framework from which equipment is flown
(see also: Appendix 1, Rigging)
Working at Heights: The Work at Heights (Regulations)
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
11/125
INTRODUCTION
1
1.INTRODUCTIONIt is vital for event management personnel to be aware of the challenges that face
them regarding health and safety and the attitudes of co-workers and other staff
towards its theory and practice on event sites. Event managers are ultimately
responsible for the safety and welfare of personnel involved in their production and
the outcome of careful risk management might be to save someones life (Shone
and Parry, 2010, p.173).
The topic this paper concerns is the healthy and safe conduct of work within theevent production industry. This primarily involves the risk assessment of all hazards
involved in any industrial activity conducted on a temporary or permanent event site
by any personnel present.
Although a great deal of literature exists discussing the regulations that must be
observed and detailing the method by which risk assessments should be conducted,
there is very little that discusses the inherent limitations of the process or the
attitude event staff have towards health and safety. This paper aims to establish
these attitudes, the reasons for them and the effect legislation has upon them via a
review of relevant literature and the interviewing of industry professionals. It will
also use recommendations from reviewed literature and interviews to generate
recommendations that may be used to assist in alleviating any problems found.
The key limitation of this study lies in its scope; ideally, more subjects would be
interviewed for primary research to generate more accurate and detailed opinions
on the topic, however due to the time constraints involved, this has not been
possible.
There are several differing opinions on the topic; some that suggest that the content
of the legislation, particularly the terminology may be at the root of problems
associated with practice.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
12/125
INTRODUCTION
2
Others suggest that it is, in fact, a lack of understanding on the part of operatives
themselves creating problems. Most sources do however, agree that attitude
towards health and safety within the live event production industry is broadly
negative.
I have a keen personal interest in the world of event production and in recent years,
have worked on many different scales of events, in a variety of roles. Whatever the
scale or application, although health and safety is always a primary concern, it is
often a contested topic. Through this paper, I would like to establish the reasons why
attitudes towards health and safety in our industry are often so poor and what can
be done by way of improvement.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
13/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
3
2.LITERATURE REVIEW2.1. INTRODUCTION TO LITERATURE REVIEWThere are a variety of different sources available that examine health and safety risk
assessments from different perspectives. It is vital for management staff to be aware
of relevant legislation, accepted code of practice and any pitfalls involved in the
process because ultimately, they are liable for any serious mistakes that occur. The
review and analysis of this literature may assist management. The majority of the
publications available are either generic or specific how to guides. Generic guides
are intended for anyone working with risk assessment (psychological, physical,
performance or economic), and include legislative documentation that provides
regulations and an accompanying accepted code of practice. Some publications are
also based on the risks specific to event management, intended for use by relevant
staff to assess hazards in both production and crowd safety. These usually
incorporate explanations of legislation, methods of quantifying risk, employer and
employee responsibility, risk management, identification of hazards and reviewing of
assessments.
Other available publications give an analytical approach towards the completion of
risk assessment. These are much fewer in number and generally exist in the form of
journal articles or critical elements within how-to guides. Authors such as Hannam
(1997, p.10-12) provide suggestions about possible flaws with the assessment
process and an outlook on health and safety in general from within the live
entertainment industry.
2.2. INTRODUCTION TO THE EVENT INDUSTRY AND EVENTPRODUCTION
The area of event management this study is concerned with is production. This
encompasses activities involved with organising and implementing the technical and
logistical delivery of an event.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
14/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
4
The issues addressed by this type of risk assessment will be relevant to one of the
production departments; these are explained in Appendix 1. Within the context of
production, the event industry comprises several main areas: festivals, touring
performance, static performance, conferences, exhibitions and special events, all of
which will require logistical and technical production.
2.3. THE RISK ASSESSMENT PROCESSVan Beek suggests
there are three main stages to any risk assessment, identification,
assessment and control [] we must first identify the hazards. We mustdescribe them sufficiently so that another, less experienced person can
recognise the hazard if confronted with it (Van Beek,2000, p.25).
Control methods must then be generated to reduce the level of risk. He goes on to
say that there are too many systems in place for assessing the risk with many
results, some are too simple, some are too complex (Van Beek, 2000, p.26).
Within the production department, risk assessments are written to cover any
operation which, when performed incorrectly, will endanger staff involved in the
production. Van Beek (2000, p.26) explains that the risk assessment should outline
how to reduce the probability of death or injury.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) give advice on regulations and legislation,
stating that there are no fixed rules about how a risk assessment should be carried
out (2004, p.8), but provide guidelines for what should be included. There may be
an advantage for some in the development of a custom method of evaluating the
level of risk, a custom format and a list of compulsory inclusions. However, a lack of
solid guidelines or format will mean that both time and financial investment are
required in order to produce all of the risk assessments necessary to stage a
production, covering activities from very low to very high risk. Van Beek suggests
that there are three aspects that all health and safety risk assessments should
contain, seriousness of injury, frequency of task and the likelihood of injury should
accident happen (2000, p.26).
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
15/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
5
Hannam states that the employer has a duty to identify any significant hazards but
does not explain or quantify the meaning of significant hazards. The HSE (2004, p.9-
10) suggest a similar method but with the additional requirement to review and
revise documents and practice regularly.
An official HSE commissioned review of good practice and common pitfalls in risk
assessment suggests that, in order to evaluate a risk fully, one must consider of
what, to what, from what (HSE, 2003b, p.8-9), so, where the risk is coming from,
who is at risk and what the implications are of the hazard occurring.
In order to assess risk, both HSE (2004, p.7) and Shone and Parry (2010, p.172)
suggest beginning by acquiring professional advice from experienced services such as
the fire brigade, police and ambulance service to establish known risks, bottlenecks
in process and in order to identify potential problems in current plans as early as
possible.
Hannam (1997, p.11) states that in a risk assessment, several items should be
included. He uses [*] to denote which are required by law. Firstly, identification* and
recording of the hazard and the listing of those at risk and approximate numbers*.
The employer must then assess the likelihood of an accident and the worst possible
outcome in the situation when controls are not in place and provide a risk
assessment accounting for information on any relevant codes of practice. They must
list any controls that are currently in place* and state what further action is
required to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Finally they must monitor the
hazard and control systems to ensure they are functioning correctly.*
This method has been selected as an example because it is both the most common
(Hannam, 1997; Van Beek, 2000; AEV et al.,2010; Higgs, 2008) and the most
thorough, covering all of the items accounted for in the most publications reviewed
without being excessive. Higgs (2003, p.39) suggests a numerical method for
establishing level of risk, by multiplying likelihood of accident by hazard severity
(both from 1-3) whereas Hannam (1997, p.12) suggests using the qualitative
method, No injury, trivial injury, minor injury, major injury and fatal injury.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
16/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
6
In a later publication, Hannam (2009, p.114) suggests rating severity, likelihood and
frequency out of 10 to give a rating out of 1000. Woking Borough Council (2014) also
suggest a similar qualitative method of High, Medium and Low risk. It is clear from
the number of different methods suggested across reviewed literature that methods
of evaluating and quantifying the hazards do vary.
Although these methods may work in theory, they are all liable to suffer from
subjectivity, particularly if guidelines are unclear. Strauch (1980, p.4) suggests that if
a problem has an unclear origin or the method by which it is solved is squishy, the
resulting solution will consequently be subjective. HSE (2004, p.6) states that the
level of detail in a risk assessment should be proportionate to the risk, however,one staff member, for example, (via whichever method of evaluation) may deem a
hazard to have a different severity level than another staff member, based on a
subjective interpretation. One could argue better safe than sorry and opt to use a
longer and more detailed risk assessment, however, this will require more resources
in terms of both time and finance, which may not necessarily be an option for those
with a low budget or a short time frame. Alternatively, if the hazard is not assessed
fully, an injury may be more likely to occur, furthermore, it could be deemed by a
legal authority that the hazard was not given enough attention and the responsible
person(s) could be reprimanded or worse. Additionally, in reference to the method
suggested by Woking Borough Council, though having fewer options may simplify
the evaluative process, it may also force inaccurate conclusions.
2.4. RESPONSIBLE PERSON(S)An appreciation of where responsibility for assessing risk lies and the hierarchal level
at which the assessment occurs and is enforced is essential to understanding liability
implications.
There are several staff members present at all events (beyond the very small), who
are responsible for the wellbeing of crew and those in direct contact with the
production.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
17/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
7
The Managing Director (Hannam, 1997, p.10) or Production Manager (sometimes
referred to as Technical Director) is ultimately responsible for ensuring that crew
operations and workflow are conducted in a healthy and safe manner (Van Beek,
2000, p.16).
The Stage Manager is also responsible for overseeing any activity that takes place
on, adjacent to or behind the stage [...] and the overall layout and physical
preparation of the stage and all its setting(StageSafe, 2014, p.7). The staff member
in charge of distributing and organising crewing for an event, the Crew Chief, is
responsible for ensuring that people working for them are protected from hazards
[] and that safe working practices are in place and followed (Van Beek, 2000,p.16).
While the Production Manager is responsible for co-ordinating all the technical and
staging requirements of a production (Theatres Trust, 2014), in a theatre, the Front
of House Manager is responsible for the safety and wellbeing of the audience. He or
she will be trained in security and health and safety, including the safe and speedy
evacuation (Theatres Trust, 2014). The lack of reference to the Front of House
Manager in relevant literature suggests that there is no direct equivalent to this
theatre role at an outdoor festival. In this instance, overall responsibility for health
and safety will belong to the Event Manager (Ineson, 2012).
Although the Production Manager (or equivalent) is usually responsible for the
production of risk assessments, he or she is not ultimately liable for any injuries that
occur. It is the responsibility of overall management, such as a promoter, to maintain
the welfare and safety of persons involved in a production and to ensure any
documentation and practice that is in place is adequate.
2.5. INDUSTRY PERCEPTIONUnfortunately, due to a history of lax attitude towards health and safety within the
events industry suggested by Hannam (2009, p.21), there are very limited records to
illustrate the history of accidents in the area.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
18/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
8
Hannam (2009, p.21) further states:
Tim Norman of Edwin Shirley Staging [] rightly states we have a very good
record for Health and Safety within our industry, but the reason we have
such a good record is not necessarily because we are safe, but because there
are no records!.
Various pieces of legislative practice such as Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and
Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR) and Management of Health and
Safety at Work Regulations (MHSWR) have put control and monitoring measures
into place. However, if, as Hannam and Norman suggest, there are no (or very few)
existing records of injuries in the event industry prior to these being put in place,
assessing the differences made by them would be difficult. This method of working,
assessing and reviewing has received a slow uptake within the industry.
Despite being aware and knowing what is required of them, the majority still
do very little about complying with H&S law and regulations [] others
produce documentation [] but do nothing about implementation and
operating the required control systems (Hannam, 2004, p.21).
Later, Hannam (2004, p.23) also notes that
over the last five or six years, I have seen changes starting to take placeregarding peoples attitudes towards H&S, together with a growing number
of companies really starting to make very serious efforts towards better
health and safety management.
Patterns are also suggesting that it is small, upcoming companies wishing to
establish themselves with good practice who are adopting new methods, rather than
large companies. This can help them towards gaining preferred or approved
contractor statuses such as Safe:Contractor (Hannam, 2004, p.23).
Cox (2014) suggests that there are five major possible causes for accidents in the
entertainment industry, all of which are within the control of staff members. These
include the necessity to constantly work at a fast pace and under physiological
stress, which can lead to corner cutting.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
19/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
9
Unsafe conditions may involve the use of poorly maintained equipment or working
in low light conditions and negative attitudes and laziness can lead to reluctance to
adopt recommended safety advice. Staff may not have received sufficient training
to complete activities to a safe standard. However, all of these factors can be risk
assessed and control measures put in place. These may include education to
illustrate the necessity for health and safety measures and thus improve attitudes,
improvement of working conditions, ensuring good upkeep of equipment, and using
contingency time combined with the monitoring of staff working hours so stress and
tiredness is kept to a minimum.
However, there is some evidence that larger institutions are improving on health andsafety practice. Katrina Gilroy (2011), Production Manager at the National Theatre
does suggest that some changes are being made at a higher level, "When I started
out, you didn't train to be a production manager. In the last four to five years, that's
actually changed, in many ways because of legislation and health and safety.
2.6. LEGISLATIONHSE (2014c) state that both The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act (HASAWA) 1974
and the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations (MHSWR) 1999 place
duties on companies and individuals to ensure that adequate provision is made for
health and safety at work.Making an assessment of health and safety risks arising
out of work is a legal requirement underMHSWR. Regardless of industry or
application, all employers with more than five employees are required to produce a
written risk assessment outlining safe operating practice (HSE, 2014b).
For any event to be staged, responsible parties are legally obliged to produce risk
assessments, this being necessary under the legal principle, duty of care. This is in
place to ensure those parties take all reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions
that could injure employees, contractors, users, participants and visitors(Shone and
Parry, 2010, p.173).
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
20/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
10
Breach of duty of care is covered under statute law and offenders may receive a fine,
or in serious cases, be sent to prison (Hinde and Kavanagh, 1998, p.2).
For event managers, duty of care means taking actions that will prevent any
foreseeable risks of injury to the people who are directly affected by, orinvolved in, the event [] including event staff, volunteers, the performers,
the audience or spectators and the public in the surrounding areas (Shone
and Parry, 2010, p.576-7).
Accepted healthy and safe working practice is documented by the Health and Safety
at Work etc. Act 1974 (HASAWA) which requires employers to take reasonably
practicable precautions in various areas to safeguard employees and, to do this, an
assessment of the risk and the steps needed to remove or reduce them needs to be
made (Office Safety Company, 2014).
Additionally, the MHSWR 1992 also requires employers to record significant results
and information based upon risk assessments (Office Safety Company, 2014).
Regulation 3 of MHSWR states that all employers should make an assessment
of the risks to the health and safety of employees to which they are exposed
while they are at work and of the risks to the health and safety of persons not
in employment arising out of or in connection with the conduct of theemployers undertaking (Office Safety Company, 2014).
There are several areas where, should an employer find a breach of regulations, this
must be fully assessed and either removed or alternative methods of completing the
task put in place. These areas include noise and electricity, manual handling and
hazardous chemicals, The Health & Safety Executive publish copies of the latest
legislation (Van Beek,2000, p.30) with accompanying suggestion and guidelines.
There are many regulations under the umbrella of HASAWA and these must be
applied where applicable(Hannam, 1997, p.53). Health and Safety Group (2014)
further state that specific risk assessments should also be conducted to encompass
the regulations covering hazards such as toxic substances, safe use of electrical
systems, noise at work and personal protection equipment.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
21/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
11
The accepted code of practice accompanying MHSWR states that anything with the
potential to cause harm [] (including articles, substances, plant or machines,
methods of work, the working environment and other aspects of work organisation)
will impact upon those affected and what measures can be taken to manage
those risks (HSE,2004). This legislation states that two things combine to create
risk, the threat (meaning level of harm) a hazard poses and the likelihood of an
incident taking place.
HSE (2004, p.6) approved code of practice for regulation 3 states that the level of
detail in a risk assessment should be proportionate to the risk and that
insignificantrisks can be ignored. Risk assessments conducted should also besuitable and sufficientand a thorough explanation of these terms is given in the
guidance. Despite this, no qualification is supplied as to the meaning of the phrases
impact upon those affectedand insignificant. Later in the text, it is stated that a
risk assessment should ensure the significant risks and hazards are addressed (HSE,
2004, p.8) and as before, no further explanation as to the meaning of significant is
mentioned. It is therefore left to the responsible person(s) to decide at what point a
health hazard is worth the time and financial outlay required to make it safe.
The explanation of RIDDOR found in Hughes and Ferrett (2006, p.259) does state
that if an employee has to take leave as the result of an injury for more than three
days then they must notify the enforcing authority within ten days. This may
suggest that a serious injury should be seen as anything that causes an employee to
be unable to work for more than three days, however this is the only guide to
severity found in these regulations.
All publications suggest that a risk assessment should cover any hazard that has the
potential to seriously injure or kill, but the lower levels of potential harm necessary
to warrant the use of a risk assessment was an area of particular vagueness. Hannam
states that there are five classes of injury: no injury, trivial injury, minor injury,
major injury and fatal injury (1997, p.12) but makes no suggestion as to which
require the risks to be assessed and which do not.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
22/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
12
He later states a lot more work has to be done to get clarification on the regulations
and standard set for rigging and climbing operations. We need set standards that are
acceptable to the HSE and not just ourselves (1997, p.53).
In the literature reviewed, it is unclear at what stage a risk is severe enough to
qualify financial outlay. For example a Production Manager may have to decide
whether to spend the large additional cost of hiring an access vehicle to hang rigging
points as opposed to climbing with a harness and safety net. The former is certainly
safer, but at a very high cost. If there are different methods in place to assess these
risks, an employer may decide that using a rated harness and a safety net is safer
than using an access vehicle to save on costs. This lack of standardisation may leadto increased subjectivity whilst assessing risks and consequently lead different
personnel to different conclusions about how safe performing an activity may be.
Hindmarsh and Simpson suggest that people suffer subjectivity based on several
physiological factors including context, familiarity, control, cost and benefit and
likelihood of being caught. They go on to suggest that the variability of influence in
individual risk perceptions makes it important not to rely on individual assessors
(Hindmarsh and Simpson, 1996, p.63) and suggest that a committee should be used
instead. Furthermore, to combat the potential reduction of financial outlay on
Health and Safety, Hannam (1997, p.53) states that HSE consider that the amount
spent by any business on training and H&S must be proportionate to the turnover of
the business in question. However, without quantification, proportionate is a
vague term.
2.7. CRITICISMS OF RISK ASSESSMENTIt has been suggested that the sheer level of health and safety regulation is stifling
some areas of the industry,
in particular, small-scale local community and cultural events. Organisers []
often find the myriad rules, regulations and legalities intimidating. They fear
that they might face the cost of acquiring licenses and permits, and worry
about navigating the legal system, so [] frequently come to the conclusion
that it is not worth the effort (Baldenet al., 2012, p.198).
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
23/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
13
Further to this, Brett (1995, p.168) suggests
good workingpractices have been established for most activities and when
these are followed, the likelihood of serious injury or fatality is minimised []
It is likely that in almost any situation the lack of application of common
sense and responsible supervision may have a part to play.
He also cites familiarity, repetition and tiredness as reasons for alteration of safe
working practices, which lead to an increased chance of accidents.
Hannam (2009, p.59) suggests there are financial implications of being legally
obliged to produce risk assessments. Not only is there an added production cost, but
the value of an individuals time is compromised with an extra work load. This is
particularly true for anyone working as a freelance Production Manager (or
equivalent); they are required to spend an amount of time producing risk
assessments, increasing the amount of time spent providing a service to achieve the
same result. If risk assessment processes were standardised, this may result in
Production Managers having to spend less time producing risk assessments for
generic tasks or potentially causing a compromise in safety if risks are not thoroughly
considered. Alternatively, Hannam states the whole point about these assessments
is that they should not just be a paper exercise (1997, p.13) and that practices
should be constantly monitored in order to ensure they are working. If the
responsible person wrote a risk assessment using a standardised method, that
assessment may receive less attention in the long term, not be properly enforced or
may not be revised with due attention.
HSE (2003b, p.51) states that
While there exists a large body of published material on the general topic of
risk assessment and its application, very few references were found that
include material of relevance to the critical review of methodologies or
information on risk assessment pitfalls.
The study they conducted as a result found a series of common faults with risk
assessment; these can be found in Appendix 2.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
24/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
14
Most relevant of these to this Literature Review include the use of a generic
assessment when a site-specific assessment is needed, (if the site in question has
unique risks or circumstantial hazards) and
carrying out a detailed quantified risk assessment without first consideringwhether any relevant good practice was applicable, or when relevant good
practice exists. Not involving a team of people in the assessment or not
including employees with practical knowledge of the process/activity being
assessed,
leading to failure to identify all hazards associated with a particular activity and
failure to fully consider all possible outcomes (HSE, 2003b, p.51).
Although some hazards may require site-specific risk assessments, there are many
items that will be general and can be sufficiently covered by a generic assessment.
This would also alleviate the problem of not involving employees in creating control
methods and failure to identify hazards. If assessments were already completed
using advice from consultants and employees with a good practical knowledge of
approved practice, time and expense may be saved. However, complacency brought
about by this may lead to failure to consider all risks that are present.
2.8. CHAPTER SUMMARYThis Literature Review has detailed the way in which legislation regarding health and
safety risk assessment interacts with the practice of assessing risk and the way it is
perceived by members of the industry. It has identified that there are no fixed rules
regarding risk assessment in the HASAWA or MHSWR but there are some items that
must be included by law. The event organiser, such as a promoter, is liable for the
enforcement of this at an event and generally, a Production Manager or equivalent is
responsible for the production of these documents. There was also debate over the
impact of the broad nature of terminology in relevant legislation upon the scope and
level of detail included in risk assessments in different given situations. It appears
that there is however, a broadly negative attitude towards health and safety within
the industry, something which research will attempt to establish a reason for.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
25/125
LITERATURE REVIEW
15
2.9. CHAPTER CONCLUSIONThis Literature Review has examined documentation with varying levels of formality,
from official legislative documents to informal commentary of risk assessment
practice and theory. The process of production within the event management
industry involves the logistical and technical facilitation of live events, within which,
the protection of the welfare and safety of staff associated with the production is
necessary under the HASAWA and MHSWR. The method by which these pieces of
legislation dictate that a responsible person must ensure the welfare and safety of
his or her staff is via the use of risk assessments.
Drawing on the information gathered, several key issues have been identified: The
first is that accidents are still occurring in places of work and according to Hannam
(2004, p.28), up to 75% of these may be preventable which may be attributed to
several factors. The open-endedness of many guideline documents (for example
HSE, 2004; Hannam, 1997; Hughes and Ferrett, 2006) leaves much of the legislative
terminology open to interpretation, particularly that regarding severity of injury and
required level of detail. This provides potential for increased subjectivity in
assessment of risk level and consequently, the level of detail and time given to risk
assessments and the level of control measures put in place to assist in the reduction
of those risks (Hindmarsh and Simpson, 1996). It is also possible that some
conclusions in risk assessment may be reached as a result of financial and time
constraints.
In order to examine these theories in greater depth, research has been conducted to
establish the extent to which subjectivity in the evaluation of hazards affects the
control measures provided to reduce risk level and if standardisation of the risk
assessment process is consequently necessary. The following chapter will explain the
methods by which the research will be conducted and the limitations that will have
to be considered.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
26/125
METHODOLOGY
16
3.METHODOLOGY3.1. INTRODUCTIONThe primary issue identified in the Literature Review was that of the potential for
subjectivity in the risk assessment process as a result of vague terminology and lack
of detail in relevant guidance documentation. The research conducted will assess the
degree to which this subjectivity is a problem in practice, and if so, how the partial or
complete standardisation of either risk assessment procedure or situation-specific
control measures would affect this subjectivity.
3.2. METHODS3.2.1.Chosen Data TypeThe information collected to provide the study with a basis for report and analysis of
thoughts from within the industry will exist in the form of qualitative data. This will
be collected using individual interviews, discussed in the Data Collection section of
the Methodology (3.2.3). During these interviews, open-ended questions will invite
discussion of surrounding topics to aid in the identification of any additional issues.
Qualitative data provides a large amount of detail on a topic in the subjects own
words, meaning statements have a high level of validity. There is also increased
potential for complex answers as necessary, allowing more detail to be obtained
(Yum, 1998). The method also allows a detailed picture to be built up about why
people act in certain ways and their feeling about these actions (Kruger, 2003).
Conversely, the length of time required to gain information means that more people
can be studied in the same amount of time using quantitative methods. This,
combined with the open-endedness of answers can also make it more difficult to
generalise, and for consistent comparisons to be drawn (Anderson, 2010).
However, because of the level of validity and depth of available information, the
collection of qualitative data is the chosen method.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
27/125
METHODOLOGY
17
According to Whittlemore et al., the use of qualitative data puts the validity of the
results at risk. He suggests that the researcher may be drawn to subjective
conclusions because information is convenient or related to the expected outcome.
In order for research to be fully valid, the researcher must not lose sight of the
original intentions of the study by focusing on methods and procedure, he or she
must be unbiased and focus on the original objective of the research to gain the
most valid data (2001, p.543).
3.2.2.SampleIn order to assess the subjectivity and practical viability of standardisation, the
population consists of staff with industry experience of dealing with risk assessment
procedure. The population comprises of technicians, working in both theatre and
music, across various technical specialisms in both freelance and contract capacities.
They must not be too new to the industry not to be aware of the use or application
of risk assessments. Using staff in technician positions should mean they understand
risk assessment procedure and at least some of the legislation involved. They will
also deal directly withthe control measures put in place by staff above them.
This sample has been selected using convenience sampling. Cresswell and Maietta
(2002, p.55) state that this is the process of selecting sampling units by some form
of random sampling. In this case, the sample has been selected based on accessible
population, combined with a spread of roles within the event production industry.
Interviewees in this cross section were then selected as a sample group. The selected
subjects perform a variety of different roles across the industry, but all involve
health and safety management and regular contact with risk assessment procedure
and control measures. Each interviewees industry position has been indicated in
Table 1. Cresswell and Maietta (2002, p.55) do, however, suggest that there is a risk
of duplication or omission of parts of the sector if care is not taken.
The sample selected contains five event and health and safety professionals who
deal with health and safety on a regular basis.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
28/125
METHODOLOGY
18
Many of them are also able to identify changes in perception and acceptance of
health and safety across the industry since relevant legislation was introduced. Their
professional status and experience suggests they are competent and able in the
completion of risk assessments and the design of control methods, sufficient to
reduce risk level. For these reasons, they are able to suggest the impacts that
standardisation may have, along with other recommendations for improving risk
assessment practice, guidelines and legislation.
Below is a table of interview participants with a summary of their professional
activity and the reasons why they were chosen as interviewees.
Participant
and industry
position
Professional Summary Reason Chosen
Interviewee 1
Festival
Producer
This multi-scale Event
Producer has experience
of primarily outdoor
festivals with capacities of
between 1,000 and 15,000
for the past three years.
This participant regularly produces risk
assessments for events, sometimes in
conjunction with a Production Manager.
They also spent ten years working in health
and safety in construction so are able to
draw comparisons between the two
industries and what the event industry maybenefit from.
Interviewee 2
Venue
Production
Manager
A Venue Manager
overseeing all technical
aspects of several 500
capacity venues around
London for the past two
years.
This participant has seen a significant
increase in the presence of health and
safety procedure during their time working
as a freelance technician, Venue Technician
and Venue Production Manager over the
last ten years. They now deal directly with
risk assessments on a very regular basis,
writing their own for the venue in which
they are Production Manager.
Interviewee 3
Crew Chief
Overall coordination of up
to 100 local crew in a
major UK arena for the
past two years
Even in their short time working in this job
role, this participant has observed
considerable changes in attitudes towards
health and safety at the large-scale end of
the industry. They have a comprehensive
understanding of the production process
and all its hierarchal levels and their
respective responsibilities. As a
consequence, they have a sound knowledge
of risk assessment procedure and its affect
on different levels in an organisation.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
29/125
METHODOLOGY
19
Participant
and industry
position
Professional Summary Reason Chosen
Interviewee 4
H&S Advisor
(music
performance)
Working in the event
industry for over 40 years,now considered a leading
industry expert in health
and safety in event
production. They also
created the Safety Pass
Alliance (SPA) Live Event
Safety Passport Scheme.
This interviewee spent time as Production
Manager for one of the worlds largestgreenfield music festivals, at which point
they became aware of relevant legislation.
Since then, they have written several books
and papers about both health and safety in
general and risk assessment specifically.
Interviewee 5
H&S Manager
(culturalevents)
Working on large scale,
high budget events for six
years, Health and Safety
Manager for one of the
largest events in the UK in
2015.
This interviewees main job role is the
writing and approving of risk assessments
for their own company and sub-contractors.
They advise companies and help bring them
up to the high standards of their employing
company using extensive knowledge of
relevant legislation.
Table 1: Summary of professional activity and reasons for choosing interview
participants
3.2.3.Data CollectionData was collected via individual interviews with subjects. These interviews were
semi-structured so that conversation could be in more depth. It is suggested by
Langley (1987, p.24 cited in M.K., 2010) that these in-depth, less structured
interviews are more valid. A less formal interview may also encourage the subject to
be more open and honest, a fact particularly relevant to this study, as there is
potential for answers to be of a compromising nature. The lengthy nature of this
style of interview also meant that fewer interviews could be conducted than by using
a more structured style, however, using this method allowed subjects to discuss, at
length, what they perceive as key issues on the topic. As points of interest arose,
they could be discussed further by the interviewer and interviewee, which in turn
revealed previously unexplored areas of relevance.
Several other methods of data collection were considered; these were via group
interview and by survey.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
30/125
METHODOLOGY
20
In comparison to individual interviews, discussion between interviewees in group
interviews may result in new ideas being generated and discussed. The Institute of
Customer Studies (2012), Kitzinger (2004, p.269) and Seale (2004, p.254) all agree
that they help in providing a more naturalistic environment since people are
influenced in what they can say and do by the presence of others. However,
opinions may be over-emphasised or not fully articulated if an interviewee is less
confident in their ideas or experience. Furthermore, this environment may cause
some interviewees to be reluctant to share sensitive information (Institute of
Customer Studies, 2010). For this reason, the method was rejected. The chosen
method is also subject to the same issue of the interviewees being reluctant to share
sensitive information; in order to avoid this, interviews were conducted
anonymously. In order to re-create this naturalistic environment in an individual
interview setting, Oakley (2004, p.254-5) suggests researchers
ought to tell interviewees about their own experiences so that the
encounter becomes a mutually co-operative event [so that] the level of trust
and commitment is likely to generate more authentic information.
For the purposes of preserving anonymity some names of events, personnel and
companies have been excluded. There are instances in which companies or
individuals have been named which could be interpreted as libel so these titles have
also been excluded. Full interview transcripts can be found in Appendix 3.
Surveys were also considered for this study. Surveys are easier to develop than
interview questions and are more convenient because they can be remotely
administered.
The information supplied by them is also primarily quantitative, making it easier to
present clearly. However, the closed nature of the answer options provides a validity
rate lower than interview methods. This method also limits depth of discussion and
it is primarily for this reason that the method has been rejected (Wyse, 2012).
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
31/125
METHODOLOGY
21
3.2.4.Interview ContentJones (2004, p.258) suggests that over-structuring of questions can become an issue.
There is a risk that an interviewer has already predicted [] what is relevant and
meaningful to their respondents about the research topic and in doing so, have
significantly prestructured the direction of the enquiry. As a result of these
subconscious choices, a level of structure and direction for the interview is added.
The interviewer must ensure their own values and theories are not getting in the
way of understanding those of the respondents (2004, p.259). To combat this,
information will be received in an open manner. The interviewer will limit the range
of topics discussed, however, the opinions given during that discussion, whether
agreeing or disagreeing with the hypothesis of study, will be taken into account.
In order to gain a breadth of information and allow previously unconsidered topics
to be discussed, questions have been written in an open manner so subjects are not
lead to conclusions by the interviewer. Below is a list of questions asked in
interviews and a rationale behind them.
Question Rationale
What has your involvement with risk
assessment been during your career?
To establish the level of knowledge and
previous experience the interviewee has
with risk assessing and using control
methods.
In your experience, has there been any
change in perception and application of
health and safety in the industry?
To establish the extent to which changes
indicated by research have been felt by the
interviewee.
To what extent are you aware of relevanthealth and safety legislation such as
HASAWA and RIDDOR? Have you ever read
these? What is the effect of responsible
persons completing documentation using
received understanding of legislation?
To establish whether or not the intervieweeis aware of the content of relevant
legislation and if so, their opinion on it.
Furthermore, the effect any lack of direct
contact with this has.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
32/125
METHODOLOGY
22
Question Rationale
There are various statements within
HASAWA such as guidelines like the level of
detail in a risk assessment should be
proportionate to the risk HSE (2004, p.6),and that insignificant risks can be ignored.
Risk assessments conducted should also be
suitable and sufficient (HSE, 2004, p.6).
What do you think of the use of terminology
like this? Does its open nature enable or
hinder? Does this invite unnecessary
subjectivity?
Does the interviewee think the terminology
is too vague or that this is necessary because
of the number of different things risk
assessments have to cover and the differingcircumstances in which they have to be
applied.
If either the content or the structure of risk
assessments were to be either fully or partly
standardized, what would the implications
be? Can you give examples of circumstances
in which this would assist or obstruct process
or control measures?
To establish the interviewees opinion
whether or not full or partial standardisation
is possible and if it would then work in
practice.
Are there any other methods you think could
be used to improve legislation, guidelines or
practice in assessing risk?
Are there any other changes, aside from
standardisation, that the interviewee
believes could improve risk assessment
procedure in terms of both health and safety
and financial outlay.
Table 2: Interview questions with rationale
3.2.5.EthicsMcNiff et al.(1996, p.101-2) suggest that there are some ethical issues involved in
the interview process. They advocate that if possible, the interviewer should explain
the rationale for the research, that the interviewer should not deceive people in
order to get (the interviewee) to impart information and the interviewer should be
prepared to maintain complete confidentialityif this is requested or promised.
3.2.6.ProcedureThe interviews will be conducted either face-to-face, via telephone call or via video-
conferencing software such as Skype or FaceTime, allowing access to subjects who
may be geographically out of reach.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
33/125
METHODOLOGY
23
As interviews are still effectively face-to-face, the main issue is possible technical
failure, such as poor internet or telephone connection. If problems arise regarding
this, the conversation will be stopped and resumed when an adequate connection is
available. Data will be audio-recorded during interviews using software on a mobile
device and then transcribed. The primary pitfall of this method is that it leaves the
interviewer with a lot of information to transcribe, consider and analyse. There is
also risk of technical failure and loss of original files. To combat this, two separate
recording devices will be used and files will be stored online.
Whilst reviewing the interview recordings it became clear that small sections were
inaudible. As a second recording could not be made, the transcriptions of theseinterviews indicate when audio quality was too low to be heard. However, these
sections are broadly names of personnel or parts of connecting sentences and
although this is inconvenient, it is not detrimental to the coherence of the transcripts
and does not impede gathering of information from them.
3.3.
IMPORTANCE AND LIMITATIONS
3.3.1.Importance of StudyAs is evidenced in the Literature Review of this study, accidents still take place,
despite the existence of control measures such as HASAWA and RIDDOR. There is
also a suggestion that up to 75% of these accidents may be avoidable (Hannam,
2004, p.27). Hannam (1997) suggests that legislative guidelines on risk assessments
must be made clearer, and an assessment of the degree of subjectivity present in
risk assessments would assist in evidencing a need for new, clearer guidelines to be
issued.
Furthermore, examining standardisation as a solution for the reduction of
subjectivity will provide research upon which to draw for anyone intending to
research the improvement of risk assessment legislation.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
34/125
METHODOLOGY
24
The study therefore will be useful for several parties; anyone seeking to improve
their own risk assessment procedure may use the study to assist in the identification
and control of any subjectivity present in their procedure. Additionally, anyone
seeking to make recommendations towards the improvement of legislation or
guidelines may find both subjectivity and standardisation useful areas for further
research.
It is also important to note the context of health and safety and risk assessment
within management. A manager is ultimately responsible for the welfare and safety
of those involved in the event, including audience, performers and production staff.
If serious injuries occur it is not unusual for liability to be traced back to eventmanagement such as a promoter, despite the likelihood that they had no direct
involvement with the incident and management can be penalised with serious fines.
The reasons for this are discussed further in the Legislation section of the Literature
Review (2.6).
3.3.2.Limitations of the studyThe primary limitation of the study is its scope. Ideally, more subjects would be
interviewed to give a more accurate and wider impression of opinions on the topic.
This would in turn, increase reliability (Langley, 1987, p.24 cited in M.K., 2010). In
order to increase the scale of the study, between 30 and 40 subjects would be
required, which, combined with the amount of time required to analyse this quantity
of data, would make this increase in size unviable in the time allotted to complete it.
The second limitation is that of accuracy. Although care has been taken to use
interviewees with sound knowledge and experience of health and safety in the event
industry, it cannot be ensured that all facts supplied are correct. Any facts given by
interviewees regarding legislation, which are used during the analysis, will be cross-
referenced to ensure their accuracy.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
35/125
METHODOLOGY
25
DATA ANALYSIS
Based on the models suggested by Cresswell and Maietta (2002, p.147), the method
of data analysis will be to identify narrative aspects such as stories, themes,
descriptions and assertions. In this type of collection, the stories constitute as the
data (Cresswell and Maietta, 2002, p.147). The transcripts generated from this data
collection provide the raw data for researchers to analyze [sic] as they retell or
restory based on narrative elements such as problems, actions and resolutions
(Ollerenshaw & Cresswell, 2000 cited in Cresswell and Maietta, 2002, p.149).
Perakyla (2004, p.325) suggests that the quality of transcribed data may be
dependent on the audio quality of the original recording, but as mentioned, multiple
recordings will be made to ensure at least one good quality recording. However,
during the transcription process, prosody (rhythm of speech) and intonation may be
omitted, providing a document that may not accurately display the interviewees
comments. However, it would be beyond the scope of this research paper to analyse
prosody, intonation or tone of voice as the parties analysing the data are not
qualified to do so.
In order to analyse this data, transcripts of conducted interviews will be reviewed. In
each transcript, statements and concepts considered to relate directly to any of the
questions will be highlighted and summarised so they can be easily located in the
documents. This information will then be compiled into a summary table of findings,
in which conflicting and common opinions and suggestions can be identified, as data
is analysed question by question. Any additional points that are raised in more than
one document that do not relate directly to an individual question will also be
highlighted, and if patterns are found to occur, findings will be reported and
analysed.
If an alternative method of data analysis was to be required or if this process were to
be repeated, the method of coding would be used. Strauss and Corbin (2004, p.303)
state that this is the method of highlighting phenomena in raw data to identify
categories into which patterns of consistent or conflicting information can be sorted.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
36/125
METHODOLOGY
26
This would be grouped according to relevance to questions asked during the
interviews.
3.4. REVISIONS TO METHODOLOGYDuring interviews, it became apparent that the part-question Have you ever read
(relevant legislation such as HASAWA and RIDDOR)? was too leading and was
generating brief and simple answers. Further to Jones (2004, p.258) comment about
over structured questions, it was changed to What is the effect of responsible
persons completing documentation using received understanding of legislation?
This question proved to be considerably more insightful and constructive in gaining
information from interviewees. Although these questions appear different, the latter
question assumes most responsible persons do not read relevant legislation (as
evidenced in interview findings) and so seeks to establish the implications of this.
3.5. CHAPTER SUMMARYThis section has identified the purpose of the study and the type of data that will be
collected in order to address the question posed along with advantages and
disadvantages of that data type. Qualitative data will be collected via individual,
semi-structured interviews in person, via telephone call or via video-conference; the
advantages and disadvantages of this method have been identified alongside a
discussion of other methods that were considered. The questions that will be posed
to the interviewees have also been listed and their rationales and links to secondary
research explained. The population, frame and sample of event technicians have also
been discussed and the method by which the data collected will be analysed has
been explained.
Finally, the importance of the study has been discussed, primarily the fact that
despite legislation being in place, potentially avoidable accidents are still occurring.
Limitations, including the restricted scope and possible control measures have been
highlighted and considering these, parties that may find the study useful have been
identified.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
37/125
METHODOLOGY
27
The next chapter of this study will summarise and examine the results of the
interviews, analyse them and attempt to identify any conclusions that can be drawn.
Where possible, it will make recommendations for potential improvements or
measures that can be taken by responsible persons to address any pitfalls that are
identified.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
38/125
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
28
4.FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS4.1. INTRODUCTIONThe previous chapter discussed the methods by which research would be conducted
into the effects of health and safety risk assessment legislation on its practice and
consequent industry attitudes towards it, alongside the advantages and
disadvantages of each approach. This chapter details the findings of those interviews
and analyses the raw data supplied by interviewees. The topics discussed appear in
the same order as in the Literature Review for ease of understanding. Full transcripts
of the interviews can be found at Appendix 3.
Detail of interviewees backgrounds and a rationale for their suitability for this study
can be found in Table 1in the Sample section of the Methodology (3.2.2). A list of
guide questions that were posed to each of the interviewees can also be found in
Table 2 in the Interview Content section of the Methodology (3.2.4).
4.2. EFFECTS OF HIERARCHYThe Venue Production Manager (2014), Crew Chief (2014) and H&S Advisor (2014)
agreed that staff low down in the production hierarchy, such as local crews, are
often not aware of and do not understand the application or need for risk
assessments written to protect them from common hazards. The Crew Chief (2014)
stated that they never understood the necessity for risk assessments and that their
importance is not fully understood at the bottom of the ladder. The H&S Advisor
(2014) also agreed that this was a problem.
In contrast, the Venue Production Manager (2014) gave an example of a mid-scale
council-run music festival they had worked on at which no safety lighting was
supplied for the night time get-out, a responsibility that falls to the client. However,
the crew at the show carried on with the job regardless, despite admitting that, if
their employer had been contacted regarding the situation, they would have
recommended that the job be left until the morning.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
39/125
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
29
The interviewee suggested that the crew did not want to let down their employer.
This could illustrate either a disregard or lack of proper understanding of health and
safety compliance during that performance, potentially at the fault of the employer,
and demonstrates a lack of understanding of responsibility from the overall client,
(in this case, the relevant council), a particular culture within the organisation or the
effects of high time pressure on the event.
During the production of several festivals (ranging in capacity from 1,000 to 15,000
people), the Festival Producer (2014) has attempted to arrange Event Safety
Advisory Group (ESAG) meetings to which have been invited relevant authorities
and bodies and that generally involves the council, environmental health, police, firesafety group. On the five or so occasions when these meetings have been planned
in the past year, none had yet taken place. They have been turned down, because
in their mind there are more important things to do(Festival Producer, 2014).
These examples suggest that even some personnel at higher levels do not
understand their legal obligations regarding health and safety.
At lower levels in the hierarchy, much of the feedback from interviewees on the
topic reflected a lack of understanding of the process and the necessity for it,
resulting in a feeling of hostility towards the practice and a reduced desire to
comply. The Venue Production Manager (2014) recalled an instance when a ceiling
was being painted whilst standing on a table which collapsed and, although no one
was hurt, the interviewee agreed with the fact that most minor injuries occur simply
when corners are being cut. The Responsible Person(s) section of the Literature
Review (2.4) discusses which members of staff are responsible for producing risk
assessments for hazards. Other theories on perception and potential solutions to
combat these are discussed in the following section.
4.3. PERCEPTIONSources examined in the Literature Review indicated that attitude and perception
towards health and safety and risk assessment were often poor.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
40/125
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
30
There was also indication that some larger companies were amongst the number
with this lax attitude towards health and safety, with some smaller companies
displaying much better standards. The H&S Advisor agreed and also suggested that
there are currently four groups which summarise attitude towards health and safety
compliance amongst equipment hire companies within the industry:
The first group suggested do absolutely nothing; they make no effortstowards health and safety compliance at all.
Group 2 have all the necessary paperwork in place so that when theyreasked for it by their clients [] they can produce some generic documents,
which they give, together with their insurance documents and that seems to
satisfy. The name of a high profile promoter that fits into this group was also
given.
Group 3 have all the documents in place (and usually have corporatebranding all over them) and promote themselves in being the leaders in
health and safety [] and in fact they dont actually do anything.
Group 4 have all the documents in place and they try and do it properly;there is a small minority that really try hard to do it properly and work hard
at it(H&S Advisor, 2014). Several examples of high profile companies were
given that fit into this particular group.
(H&S Advisor, 2014).
Despite this summary, the Venue Production Manager (2014), Crew Chief (2014),
H&S Advisor (2014) and H&S Manager (2014) agreed that there had been a notable
change during their time in the industry (the Festival Producer had not been involved
in the industry long enough to comment). The Venue Production Manager suggested
that they believed that amongst technicians, there were several schools of thought
on the matter; some believe that it is over the top (and admitted they were one of
those people) and that it can sometimes hinder the outcome of a performance or
the potential for a performance(Venue Production Manager, 2014).
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
41/125
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
31
Others believe it is fully necessary; they went on to say that it shouldnt be life or
death in this industry, we should do everything safely and no one should risk their
life for entertainment(Venue Production Manager, 2014).
The Crew Chief (2014) noted that, when they started working in UK arenas, Personal
Protection Equipment (PPE) was not compulsory for crew but now there is a country-
wide agreement in place so even cleaners working on the arena floor and stalls are
required to wear hi-vis (high visibility) jackets, steel cap boots and hard hats. The
Venue Production Manager (2014) also referenced the existence of the Facebook
group Dodgy Technicians which is an open page to which event staff can post
stories and photos of shody [sic] workmanship you have witnessed in the []Entertainment Production Industry (Horn et al., 2014) as proof alone there is not
enough legislation to enforce it (health and safety in the industry).
The reasons for this attitude appear to be ingrained into the industry; both the time
and costs associated with health and safety management have a significant impact
on its application. The Venue Production Manager suggested that not enough time is
available to do things in a healthy and safe manner because an extra day [] costs X
amount more(Venue Production Manager, 2014). It is clear however, from the
responses of both the Venue Production Manager (2014) and the Crew Chief (2014)
that new regulations such as the compulsory use of Personal Protective Equipment
and the employment of staff with the sole duty of looking for health and safety
breaches would be advantageous. All of the parties contacted were aware of the
importance of health and safety, yet breaches still take place. The Crew Chief
suggested that In high budget (arena) performances at least, (health and safety) is a
huge factor and is taken very seriously(Crew Chief, 2014).
The H&S Manager suggested that this increase has, in fact, become a hindrance
because, as a Health and Safety Manager, in some cases they have had to drag
them (companies) up (to standard) kicking and screaming, whereas in others, just
need to be made more aware of what they need to do (H&S Manager, 2014).
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
42/125
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
32
Further to this, the Festival Producer (2014) suggested that companies should be
made more aware of their legal responsibilities because, on occasion, they had had
to introduce event organisers to necessary health and safety documentation, just in
the last two years. The interviewee pointed out that there had previously been no
one enforcing it to the managers or on-site staff during the festival.
This suggests that some parties are not aware that by law, they must ensure that
staff are using sufficient documentation and safe practice, and if an issue does occur,
they will be held liable. If this were more widely understood, clients may choose to
take more responsibility and invest more resources in ensuring requirements are
fulfilled. The Crew Chief (2014) highlights this point, stating that the over-archingcompany should reinforce the importance of health and safety to the Production and
Stage Managers.
4.4. LEGISLATION4.4.1.Awareness and UnderstandingAccording to The H&S Advisor (2014), at the time s/he became aware of new
legislation in 1992, they were the first at a major industry conference to have done
so. The H&S Advisor (2014) also mentioned that at this conference they were
berated at the suggestion of the use of risk assessments and that others denied its
existence. The H&S Manager (2014) suggested that there are two groups of
understanding in the industry; those that understand legislation and are able to
interpret it correctly and produce adequate documentation, and those that simply
cannot because of lack of understanding. However, the interviewee went on to say
that the company in question invests extensive resources in education to ensure
that we are the leading agency in our field(H&S Manager, 2014), a luxury that is not
always available to companies with fewer resources.
All interviewees were aware of legislation but only the H&S Manager had consciously
read any content from HASAWA.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
43/125
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
33
The Venue Production Manager on the other hand, had completed risk assessments
previously but could not recall any specific details about legally required risk
assessment content. Both the H&S Advisor (2014) and the H&S Manager (2014)
agreed that, although reading of legislation may not be completely necessary,
research into it is necessary in order to gain a sound understanding of what is
required.
The Festival Producer (2014), H&S Advisor (2014) and H&S Manager (2014) drew
comparison with the construction industry regarding awareness of legislation,
discussed further in the Construction Design and Management Regulations (CDM)
section in Appendix 4.The Festival Producer (2014) opened their interview bysuggesting that they do not think there is nearly the same level of attention to health
and safety in the event industry as there is in construction, despite some comparable
activities and suggested that more training into its content should be necessary.
4.4.2.StandardisationIn the Literature Review, the possibility of the standardisation of risk assessments
was discussed. This concluded that, although there are legal minimum requirements
for the content of risk assessments, when responsible persons are required to
produce their own set of assessments, the openness and consequent lack of
structure of the guidelines may not only have financial implications but could impact
on the welfare of people involved in the production. Financial implications could be
as a result of hiring an advisor, the time required to complete the process or develop
a custom one. The Venue Production Manager (2014) suggested that risk
assessments Should be structured in a matter of fact way, standardised. I mean,
you need someone to put in a law basically to make it happen the way it should as
opposed to people interpreting it(Venue Production Manager, 2014). The Festival
Producer (2014) also suggested that a template should be provided by the HSE to
assist those inexperienced in the completion of risk assessments to do so.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
44/125
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
34
Conversely, the H&S Advisor (2014) believed the system in place is perfectly
adequate and stated that the minimum requirement is given in the relevant
legislation; explained by Hannam in the Risk Assessment Process section of the
Literature Review (2.3). This interviewee pointed out that generic risk assessments
used by many companies, should be replaced by site-specific assessments,
concurring with the idea suggested in the Criticisms of Risk Assessment section of
the Literature Review (2.7).
The Crew Chief (2014) and the H&S Advisor (2014) further suggested that there are
too many variables to have a generic format or a generic assessment for each
hazard. The Crew Chief (2014) however, suggested that even if standardisation werein place, mistakes would still be made by crew members and injuries would still
occur.
Putting standardised methods in place would however, alleviate the issues raised in
the Literature Review of there being potential for responsible persons to assess the
level of risk involved in an activity with a view to financial benefit. The H&S Advisor
(2014) pointed out that a Production Manager completing risk assessments faces a
conflict of interest. The person in this position aims for the best value, quickest and
simplest method to make a performance happen and having to conform to health
and safety guidance may be counter-productive to these objectives. Standardised
risk assessments would be likely to be used for the same reasons, which would also
ultimately create a conflict of interest. For the same reasons, a Production Manager
may not be able to properly complete a risk assessment, therefore standardisation
of risk assessments has not been considered as a potential method of improvement.
4.4.3.TerminologyThe Literature Review discussed the implications of open terminology in legislative
documents and the interviewees were asked what implications they thought this had
on the practice of risk assessment, including the suggestion that if the method for
completing risk assessment was unclear, the resulting solution may be subjective.
-
8/12/2019 Master Dissertation 11
45/125
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
35
However, the H&S Advisor (2014) and the H&S Manager (2014) agreed that the
openness of terminology was necessary because of the number of variables involved
in each individual hazard requiring risk assessment. Both also agreed that the reason
for this terminology is to avoid prescriptive legislation.
The H&S Manager (2014) added that this terminology was only a hindrance to those
that did not understand the legislation and requirements, (a matter which is
discussed further in the Competence section of Findings and Analysis (4.5)) and that
it is helpful because it forces the people producing the documentation to think
through the process and qualify the reasons why it is safe and practicable. This is
aided by the fact that codes of practice are also being slowly removed in place of lessrigid guidelines that suggest how to perform tasks instead of stating what should not
be done.
In contrast, the Festival Producer (2014), Venue Production Manager (2014) and the
Crew Chief (2014) suggested that there should be more formalised rules because
interpretations are too varied; a method should have to be qualified. Notably the
Crew Chief (2014) suggested that there should be legal and standard codes for
practice put in p