Posted By Arran Linton - Smith
Bill,

I am glad that you have raised this question as I have been debating this point amongst many colleagues over the past week. Of the 150 deaths you quote this is only the tip of iceberg, what about the number of early deaths expected due to asbestos, what about the back injuries, vibration white finger, dermatitis, etc.

Which ever professional or peer group within the construction industry I have spoken to, I have received completely different and conflicting answers as to what they believe to be underling cause of this upward trend is.

I believe that we are missing many real reasons, because politics and fashionable safety issues are now masking many of the real causes.

What is clear to me, is that CDM should have started to make an impact in improving construction safety. Do we now need somthing bigger (other than Legislation) which is going to have greater impact than CDM?

Posted By Denis Hands
HSE reports show that the majority of fatalities and serious injuries are caused by the failure of management to adequately address safety issues.

At a recent HSE conference, a delegate quoted instances of undergraduates on construction degree courses having only 6 hours health and safety instruction during a 4 year course. Furthermore, another institution that accredits courses for future site managers is only just about to make health and safety a compulsory module of its certificate and diploma courses.

If a situation exists where degree or diploma holding entrants to the industry can take up management or supervisory roles, with little or no previous health and safety knowledge, is it any wonder that the industry has such an unenviable fatality and serious injury record?

Posted By Dot Tadman
Should we not also be thinking of targeting the 'workers' who 'just get on with the job' sometimes regardless of the safety of themselves or others because they maybe be getting complacent, or are under pressure to get the job done amongst other reasons.

I still come across on a regular basis the attitude of 'we've always done it this way and never had an accident yet, so why shouldn't we continue doing it this way' or we don't have time for all that H&S stuff, it takes too long and we're on a tight timescale....' etc.

Surely we should be trying to work more with them and finding out why there is this continuing attitude and downward trend for safety rather than an upwards one.

Regards,

Dot

Posted By Bill Fisher
Many thanks for the responses.

To summarise the respondents: Arran refers to "something bigger" and asks us not to forget the long-term health legacy; Ken asks for more Inspectors; Denis refers to "failure of management and "training of professionals"; Stuart also draws out the management issue; Dot considers "complacent workers and Peter believes in the "court deterrent".

I agree that all those issues have a part to play but I firmly believe that Arran hit the point that it is "something bigger"!

In 1983 the Government of the day was appalled at the spiralling fatalities in construction, they ran Site Safe '83. At the end of the year as people hailed it a success the sad, frightening fact was that there were more fatalities during 1983 than the previous year. HSC and HSE went on to say "that until managers and supervisers start to do their jobs then we will continue to see the terrible toll in construction".
A blitz was run across the country and the courts became more responsive (albeit tempered) to the nasties. But the people who ignored the advice managed to slip through.
And so the trend of improvement then, BANG, the rate started rising again.

I am of the opinion that:
a) We must attract a wider range of school leavers into the industry who have the ability to take in the modern needs and culture of the industry. At present, it is my opinion that with the rise in the school leaving age, the appalling image of the industry and the unwillingness of the "old band" to welcome in and support newblood means we are picking up the lower 25% of the academic fodder. AND I am not belittling these people but we do need to generate the industry into the 21st century by getting a suitable mix of abilities.

b) We need to support those that are suffering from the past but our priority must be to prevent anymore joining those who did not have the benifit of todays knowledge. Our management of the hazards of the industry must be robust.

c) I am of the opinion that Managers and Supervisers should be required to do an appropriate certification to gain a licence to operate. If they are found by the courts to be responsible then their licence would be endorsed with so many points and on toting up could be disqualified from holding such a post. Of course more serios offences would attract fines and imprisonment. But what of their families? The ex manager or superviser could still work in the industry but not in a leading role.

d) As for the training of up and coming professionals I am aware that there are moves to address this area.

e) As for the "complacent workers" I recall attending the scene of a fatal fall some years ago - the poor destroyed body was still warm as I walk away to be met no more than twenty yards away, round the corner of the structure by a fellow worker urinating.
I feel that the answer here is the adoption across the whole industry of the "Passport Scheme". Much work is taking place in this area to establish common standards and many people are working hard to reach shared agreement. We need the follow through to make it mandatory!

f) And to cap all this off we need more Inspectors to (community) police the industry. Otherwise we will fail those that want to live a long and fruitful life!

Regards
Bill

p.s. I thought of ending with "seasons greetings" until I realise that in talking of the death of so many, there will be many families out there greiving at this time - not a merry Christmas or a happy New Year for them!